The Supreme Court justices will weigh the fate of an 88-mile railroad project that would transport crude oil in Utah as they consider a dispute over whether federal officials conducted a stringent enough environmental review before approving it.

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court appeared inclined on Tuesday to limit the extent to which federal agencies must review the environmental impact of projects they regulate in a dispute over a proposed railway in Utah meant to carry crude oil that was challenged by environmental groups and a Colorado county.

The Supreme Court may narrow NEPA rules, limiting environmental reviews that have shaped federal approval of energy and infrastructure projects for decades.

An iron and copper mining project in northern Chile that has raised environmental concerns could eventually face scrutiny by the Supreme Court, the environment minister said on Tuesday, after a local tribunal annulled a 2023 denial of a proposal for the $2.

The case could end up limiting the scope of environmental analyses that the federal government conducts when considering significant infrastructure projects or management decisions.

A proposed Utah railway would quadruple the Uinta Basin’s oil production if built. Colorado and environmentalists have fought the project, arguing its impacts would extend far beyond Utah’s own borders.

The Supreme Court seemed to favor a Utah oil railroad expansion in arguments on Tuesday, but appeared more skeptical of putting strict new limits on a key national environmental law. The justices were weighing a multibillion-dollar project that could quadruple oil production in the remote area of sandstone and sagebrush.

Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday appeared generally willing to strike a blow against a key federal environmental law in a case brought by Coloradans against a controversial Utah oil-train project — but they struggled to reach a consensus on exactly how to define the new limits they might impose on the law.