A federal appeals court has roundly rejected environmental groups’ challenge to the federal government’s approval of a massive liquefied natural gas export terminal and pipeline in Louisiana.
On Tuesday, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals found that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission complied with federal law when it authorized construction of Venture Global’s CP2 LNG terminal and its associated 91-mile CP Express pipeline in 2025.
“Leaving no stone unturned, [the challengers] improbably allege the Commission committed no fewer than eleven errors under the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),” wrote Senior Judge Douglas Ginsburg, a Reagan appointee, in the opinion for the court.
“Because these arguments lack merit, we deny the petitions for review,” he added.
Judges Karen Henderson, a George H.W. Bush appointee, and Patricia Millett, an Obama pick, also joined the opinion.
Why it matters: Environmental groups and local fishermen, led by For a Better Bayou, have been fighting for years to stop the proliferation of LNG facilities in Louisiana’s Calcasieu Ship Channel, citing concerns about the cumulative effects of the facilities on air quality, the climate and local fisheries.
Commercial fishermen asked the court last year to halt construction of the CP2 project, claiming sediment was smothering shrimp, oysters and fish.
The challengers also claimed in their consolidated suit that FERC failed to properly consider the harms of the project before finding the terminal was in the public interest. They also claimed in part that FERC failed to take the required “hard look” under NEPA at the effects of the project on air quality, commercial fishing and climate change.
A skeptical court: The arguments failed to gain traction with the D.C. Circuit. Ginsburg noted that the Natural Gas Act sets a high bar for FERC to find that LNG terminals are not in the public interest. The commission begins its review with the presumption that it must approve the project under the law, Ginsburg said.
“Insofar as Bayou seeks something akin to a bright-line rule for when a terminal will be inconsistent with the public interest, it is out of luck,” Ginsburg wrote, stating that that determination was a “fact-bound inquiry.”
The court also found that a recent Supreme Court ruling limiting the scope of NEPA reviews prevented the court from considering other factors the challengers raised.
“Bayou’s challenges ultimately ask us to engage in a more searching review than precedent allows,” Ginsburg wrote.
Nathan Matthews, a senior attorney at Earthjustice, who argued the case before the D.C. Circuit, said FERC approved CP2 without arguing that the benefits outweighed its costs.
“FERC acknowledges the harm it’s causing by approving the massive CP2 LNG terminal and gas pipeline, but FERC approved the project anyway,” he said in an emailed statement.
There is still a pending lawsuit challenging the Energy Department’s alleged failure to consider how the terminal would harm the nearby community of Cameron Parish, Matthews said.
“These agencies must go back to the drawing board to do their jobs and properly serve the public interest,” he said.
FERC does not comment on litigation as a matter of policy, but a spokesperson for Venture Global praised the court’s decision.
“The CP2 facility is critical to U.S. economic growth and global energy security, and we are pleased to see FERC’s diligent, thorough review and approval of CP2 LNG upheld by the DC Circuit,” said a spokesperson for the company, in an email.
“Construction continues to advance well and safely at CP2, with first LNG expected in the second half of 2027, providing new energy supply to stabilize global markets and support our allies around the world,” the spokesperson said.
