The U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Nuclear Regulatory Commission v. Texas addresses more than just who has standing to challenge agency actions, according to legal experts Jennifer Fischell, Christian Bale, and Elizabeth Clarke from MoloLamken. The ruling emphasizes the necessity for potential litigants to actively participate in agency processes to avoid exclusion from court proceedings. Additionally, the Court clarified venue rules for Clean Air Act challenges by establishing a new two-step test, as explained by Hogan Lovells attorneys Sean Marotta and Danielle Desaulniers Stempel. The decision also marks a shift in the application of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), underscoring the importance of agency deference and limiting the scope of NEPA reviews, which affects regulated businesses. Furthermore, the Supreme Court allowed a private company to obtain a license for a stand-alone spent nuclear fuel storage facility, reflecting the Court's evolving stance on nuclear regulatory matters. These rulings collectively represent a course correction in environmental and administrative law, influencing litigation strategies and regulatory compliance.