Judicial review

Title I of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (as amended by section 1102(b)(1)) is amended by inserting after section 110 (42 U.S.C. 4336d) the following: 111. Judicial review (a) Definition of claim In this section, the term claim means a claim that— (1) is filed on or after the date of enactment of the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act of 2026; and (2) seeks judicial review under any provision of Federal law of an authorization based on a claim that an environmental review failed to be properly conducted pursuant to the requirements of this Act. (b) Limitations on claims Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a claim shall be barred unless the claim— (1) is filed not later than 150 days after the date on which, unless a shorter deadline is specified under Federal law— (A) in the case of a claim in which an environmental impact statement was prepared, the applicable authorization was published in the Federal Register; and (B) in the case of any other claim, the authorization was made public; (2) in the case of an authorization for which an opportunity for comment was provided, the claim is filed by a party that submitted a substantive comment during a public comment period associated with that authorization, with such comment being sufficiently detailed to put the applicable Federal agency on notice of the particular issue on which the party seeks judicial review; and (3) is filed by a party alleging (or has an individual member alleging) an actual or imminent injury in fact amounting to a direct harm. (c) Procedural matters for claims (1) Original jurisdiction The court of appeals of the United States for the circuit in which a project subject to an authorization will be constructed, expanded, or operated shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction over a claim. (2) Supplemental jurisdiction The courts of appeals of the United States shall have supplemental jurisdiction over other claims related to the validity of the authorization at issue in the claim within the original jurisdiction of the court of appeals. (3) Random assignment of cases To the maximum extent practicable, a court of appeals of the United States shall randomly assign judges appointed, designated, or assigned to sit as judges of the court to hear claims in a manner to avoid the appearance of favoritism or bias. (4) Deadlines for resolution A court of appeals of the United States shall render a final judgment with respect to a claim as expeditiously as possible. (5) Remedy (A) In general Except as provided in subparagraph (B) and notwithstanding any other provision of law, if a court determines that an authorization does not comply with the requirements of this Act, the only remedy the court may order to redress that violation is to remand, without vacatur or issuance of an injunction, the applicable authorization to the agency with— (i) specific instructions to correct errors or deficiencies found by the court; and (ii) a reasonable schedule and deadline for the agency to act on remand, which shall not exceed 180 days after the date on which the order of the court was entered. (B) Preliminary injunctions (i) In general Notwithstanding subparagraph (A) and subject to clause (ii), a court may issue a preliminary injunction for the applicable authorization when— (I) there is a substantial likelihood the authorization violates a Federal law other than— (aa) this Act; or (bb) division A of subtitle III of title 54, United States Code; (II) necessary to prevent irreparable harm to the plaintiff; (III) the balance of equities favors the plaintiff; and (IV) a preliminary injunction is in the public interest. (ii) Requirements A preliminary injunction issued by a court under clause (i) shall last no longer than the time the court finds is reasonably necessary— (I) for the correction of the violation described in clause (i)(I); and (II) to prevent the irreparable harm described in clause (i)(II). (6) Remanded actions (A) Continued effect of authorization An authorization remanded under paragraph (5)(A) shall remain in effect while the Federal agency corrects any errors or deficiencies found by the reviewing court. (B) Federal action during remand The activity that is the subject of an authorization remanded under paragraph (5)(A) may, notwithstanding that remand, be carried out, including during the time prescribed by the applicable court to correct the applicable errors or deficiencies. (7) Treatment of supplemental or revised environmental documents (A) In general For purposes of a claim— (i) a supplemental or revised environmental document for an authorization, when required by court order, shall be considered to be a separate environmental document; and (ii) the deadline for filing a claim for judicial review of an authorization described in clause (i) shall be the date that is 150 days after the date on which the authorization for which the supplemental environmental document is prepared is made public by the agency, unless a shorter time is specified in the Federal law pursuant to which judicial review is authorized. (B) Limitation A claim for review of an authorization described in subparagraph (A)(i) shall be limited to information contained in the final supplemental environmental documents that was not contained in a previous environmental document for the authorization. (8) Actions for use of Tribal trust resources (A) In general Except as provided in subparagraph (B), for any action that authorizes the use of lands, minerals, or other resources held in trust at the time of a final agency action by the United States for the benefit of an Indian Tribe, there shall be no administrative or judicial review of such final agency action based on a claim of failure to comply with the requirements of this Act. (B) Exceptions Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to an action for administrative or judicial review— (i) brought by the Indian Tribe for which the United States holds the lands, minerals, or other resources in trust; or (ii) that involves reasonably foreseeable effects of the final agency action that occur outside the lands, minerals, or other resources held in trust by the United States for the benefit of an Indian Tribe. (d) Role of court In reviewing a claim of whether an authorization complies with the requirements of this Act, a court shall afford substantial deference to the agency relating to the scope and contents of an environmental document. (e) Prohibition on certain claims and judicial review Notwithstanding any other provision of law, there shall not be a claim or judicial review of whether a final agency action complies with the requirements of this Act for any omission from the list described in section 3(22)(B). (f) Effect Nothing in this section— (1) establishes a cause of action or a right to judicial review; (2) places any limit on filing a claim that a person has violated the terms of an authorization; or (3) affects the right to obtain review under section 107(g)(4)..