Protect LNG Act of 2025
The Protect LNG Act of 2025 would shield certain liquefied natural gas (LNG) export and related facility projects from the typical or potentially delaying effects of environmental litigation. Specifically, it creates a scheme in which lawsuits challenging environmental reviews cannot automatically derail a permit or approval for a covered LNG project. Instead, if a court finds an environmental review violation, the agency must address the issue without vacating the permit, and processing of other covered applications continues. The bill also centralizes and accelerates judicial review in a specific U.S. Court of Appeals with a mandate for expedited handling, and it imposes a tight 90-day window to file challenges (with some carve-outs). Overall, the measure aims to streamline and speed up the permitting process for LNG export facilities, while limiting the ability to halt or significantly delay approvals through litigation. Key features include: (1) a narrow definition of what constitutes a covered application and covered facility (LNG export/placement actions that require both the Secretary of Energy and either FERC or MARAD approval); (2) protection of issued permits from being invalidated solely due to environmental review challenges; (3) a procedural framework for remanding violations back to agencies without stopping ongoing processing; (4) exclusive, expedited appellate review in the circuit court, with transfer provisions for existing cases and a strict filing deadline; and (5) a savings clause that preserves the right to allege permit violations or enforce permit terms, but not a general expansion of judicial review rights.
Key Points
- 1Defines covered applications and facilities. A covered application includes requests to export natural gas under the Natural Gas Act or to site, construct, expand, or operate a covered LNG facility, with approval required from the Secretary of Energy and either the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) or the Maritime Administration (MARAD).
- 2Effect of litigation on permits. If a civil action challenges an environmental review related to a covered facility, the existing permit, license, or approval generally remains valid and in force.
- 3Remand instead of vacatur for violations. If a court determines the environmental review violated the NGA or NEPA, the court must not vacate the permit; instead, it remands the matter to the agency to fix the violation, and the agency must continue processing all covered applications.
- 4Expedited, exclusive appellate review. Except for Supreme Court review, circuit courts have original and exclusive jurisdiction over civil actions challenging orders about covered applications. The courts of appeals must expedite such reviews and bring cases to docket as quickly as practicable after filing.
- 5Transfer and handling of existing actions. For petitions filed before enactment, cases are transferred to the appropriate court of appeals and adjudicated under the new framework.
- 6Filing deadline for challenges. A federal-law claim seeking judicial review of a permit or approval for a covered facility must be filed within 90 days after notice of final action is published in the Federal Register, unless a shorter deadline exists under the applicable federal law.
- 7Savings clause. The bill does not create a general right to judicial review or limit enforcement actions alleging permit terms violations; it only structures how and when challenges to covered applications can proceed.