Nuclear Regulatory Commission, et al., Petitioners v. Texas, et al.

The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has the legal authority to license private companies to store spent nuclear fuel away from power plants. The Court also held that only groups that officially joined the agency's licensing process as a "party" can later challenge those decisions in court under the Hobbs Act. This means Texas and other challengers could not sue because they did not follow the specific rules to become formal parties in the NRC proceedings.

This decision makes it much harder for states or environmental groups to block federal energy projects if they do not participate early and correctly in the agency process. It clears the way for private companies to build large-scale nuclear waste sites, which are needed because the U.S. lacks a permanent underground repository. For example, a private facility in a state like New Mexico or Texas can now move forward despite state-level opposition.

For decades, the U.S. has struggled to find a permanent home for nuclear waste, originally planning to use Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Because that plan stalled, private companies stepped in to offer temporary storage solutions away from nuclear reactors. This case settles a major debate over whether the NRC's power under the Atomic Energy Act allows it to approve these private, off-site storage facilities.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote the 6-3 majority opinion, joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson. Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a dissent joined by Justices Thomas and Alito.

“Simply submitting comments on a draft environmental impact statement does not confer party status, just as filing an amicus brief in court does not make one a party to the case.”

“The Nuclear Waste Policy Act explicitly prohibits storage of spent nuclear fuel anywhere except at reactor sites or federally owned facilities.”

The NRC has the power to license private nuclear waste sites, and you must be a formal party to the agency's original case to challenge those licenses in court.

The case will return to the lower courts to be finalized in line with the Supreme Court's ruling. Private companies holding these licenses can now proceed with their storage plans, while states may look for other legislative ways to regulate nuclear waste within their borders. Watch for how other federal agencies use this 'party status' rule to limit who can sue them over environmental permits.

The case focused on whether the NRC could license private companies to store nuclear waste away from reactors. It also questioned if non-parties could sue to stop those licenses.

Private companies can now build and operate storage sites for spent fuel across the country. This provides a temporary solution for waste currently sitting at active and retired nuclear plants.

To challenge an agency order, a person must be a 'party aggrieved.' This requires successfully intervening in the agency's hearing process rather than just submitting public comments.

The case is reversed and remanded (sent back) to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. That court must now dismiss the challenges brought by Texas and other non-party groups.

The Court is strictly enforcing procedural rules that limit who can sue the government. This protects federal agencies from 'collateral attacks' (indirect legal challenges) by outside groups.