Supreme Court’s Trump v. CASA Ruling Reshapes EPA Litigation Landscape
- jmaiden
- Aug 6
- 3 min read

In a landmark 6–3 decision on June 27, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court in Trump v. CASA, Inc. narrowed the availability of nationwide injunctions issued by federal district courts. The majority held that lower courts generally exceed their authority when they block federal policies beyond the named plaintiffs. For agencies like the EPA — long the target of nationwide relief in litigation over rulemakings, reorganizations, and enforcement policies — this shift could be game-changing.
Writing for the majority, Justice Barrett emphasized that injunctions should be tailored to remedy a plaintiff’s specific harm, not used as broad policy tools. However, she left the door open for expansive remedies in certain contexts — including class actions and instances where narrower relief would be impractical. While the opinion stopped short of addressing Administrative Procedure Act (APA) vacatur, a footnote flagged it as an open question for future litigation.
Environmental Implications: EPA Reorg Cases and APA Uncertainty
The decision has injected fresh uncertainty into pending litigation against the EPA, including lawsuits challenging efforts to restructure or downsize the agency. For example, a prior district court injunction had blocked a Trump administration plan to eliminate the EPA’s Office of Research and Development and implement mass layoffs across the agency. That injunction rested primarily on constitutional claims, making it vulnerable post-CASA. In the weeks following the Supreme Court's ruling, the injunction was lifted, allowing the EPA to resume its reorganization efforts, including announcing the next phase of structural changes and notifying employees of impending layoffs, such as those affecting environmental justice staffers. New litigation has emerged in response, with groups filing complaints challenging the termination of environmental and climate justice grant programs, arguing that the changes were implemented without adequate consideration of consequences.
Importantly, APA claims raised in related litigation remain unresolved. Whether courts can continue using APA vacatur to unwind unlawful agency actions on a nationwide basis is now a legal gray area. As of August 2025, no major Supreme Court ruling has addressed this directly, but scholars like Prof. Christopher Walker anticipate a coming wave of challenges aimed at limiting APA-based relief as well, with some justices signaling it may be tackled soon.
Class Actions and Procedural Strategy Take Center Stage
Going forward, plaintiffs challenging federal environmental rollbacks may increasingly pursue class certification or join state-led coalitions to preserve their ability to secure meaningful remedies. Class actions could still warrant broad injunctive relief, especially where class members face uniform harms.
Litigants are also exploring more creative procedural avenues. For example, EPA grant recipients affected by recent funding cuts and layoffs are now seeking class status to restore access to environmental justice resources. Success in these efforts could provide a roadmap around CASA’s constraints, though outcomes remain uncertain amid ongoing appeals.
What It Means for Regulated Entities and Enforcement
For industry stakeholders, this ruling could offer a procedural shield against sweeping orders from individual district courts. But that doesn’t mean smooth sailing. Companies may now face a patchwork of decisions across multiple jurisdictions, driving up compliance costs and legal complexity.
Meanwhile, enforcement litigation—especially under Title VI and disparate-impact claims—continues to encounter headwinds. In Louisiana, for instance, a federal district court issued a permanent injunction in August 2024 blocking the EPA from enforcing disparate-impact requirements under Title VI statewide, a ruling that has held firm without expansion to a nationwide scope despite state efforts to broaden it. CASA has cast further doubt on the viability of any attempts to seek nationwide relief in similar cases, though the EPA has continued advancing environmental justice priorities elsewhere. Recent updates confirm the agency will not impose such requirements in Louisiana, but litigation trackers indicate no new federal appeals or shifts as of early August 2025.
Bottom Line: Fragmented Remedies, Strategic Litigation
The Supreme Court has narrowed the path for nationwide injunctions but hasn’t clarified what’s next, particularly on APA vacatur. In the month since the ruling, we've seen immediate impacts, such as the EPA advancing its reorganization and downsizing plans, including union curtailments and staff reductions at key offices. As lower courts navigate these uncharted waters, plaintiffs, agencies, and regulated industries must prepare for a more fragmented, higher-stakes litigation landscape.
If your organization is involved in environmental litigation or navigating EPA compliance challenges, now is the time to reassess your strategy. CASA didn’t just redraw the rules — it shifted the whole playing field, and ongoing developments underscore the need for adaptive approaches.
Comments