New LNG Bill Blocks Courts from Canceling Permits—Even When Environmental Reviews Are Flawed

The newly proposed Protect LNG Act of 2025 is laser-focused on one thing: making sure that big Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) export projects can’t be stopped by environmental lawsuits. This bill essentially rewrites the rules for how courts can handle legal challenges against permits for these massive facilities. Specifically, if a court finds that the federal government—say, the Department of Energy (DOE) or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC)—messed up the environmental review for an LNG facility, the court is barred from canceling the facility’s permit or approval (Sec. 3).

Instead of vacating the permit, the court must simply send the case back to the agency and tell them to fix the environmental review error. Crucially, the facility’s permit remains valid and operational while the agency goes back to the drawing board to correct its mistake. This is a huge shift, as traditionally, a flawed review under laws like the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) could lead to a permit being thrown out, forcing construction or operation to pause until the government got it right. Under this bill, the government gets a do-over, and the project keeps moving.

The Environmental Review Safety Net Gets a Hole

Think of the environmental review process like the inspection sticker on your car. If the mechanic misses something major, the car shouldn't be on the road until it's fixed. This bill says that even if the court finds the inspection sticker was issued based on bad data, the car—the LNG facility—gets to keep driving while the mechanic tries to fix the paperwork. For communities living near these massive industrial sites, this is a major concern. If a court finds the environmental impact statement failed to properly account for local air quality or seismic risks, the facility can continue operating under a legally flawed permit until the agency eventually completes its mandated fix.

Moreover, the bill mandates that even if one project’s permit is sent back for environmental remediation, the agencies must keep processing all other pending LNG applications (Sec. 3). This means there’s no systemic pause to figure out why the reviews were flawed in the first place, potentially leading to a pattern of rushed or inadequate reviews for subsequent projects.

Centralizing the Courthouse and Speeding the Clock

This legislation also tightens the rules for who can sue and when. First, it dictates that any legal challenge to an agency decision on an LNG facility permit must be filed directly in the U.S. Court of Appeals that covers the specific area where the facility is located (Sec. 4). This bypasses the typical route of starting in a local District Court, which can often be more accessible to local citizens and environmental groups. Once the case is filed, the Court of Appeals is required to treat it as an urgent, expedited matter, pushing it to the front of the line.

But the biggest hurdle for public oversight is the new statute of limitations. If you want to challenge a permit, license, or approval for an LNG facility, you have a strict 90-day deadline to file your lawsuit after the agency publishes the final notice in the Federal Register (Sec. 4). For a community group or local resident trying to wade through complex federal notices and secure legal counsel, 90 days is a tight window. If they miss that deadline, their legal right to challenge the permit based on federal law is simply gone. This provision effectively prioritizes project certainty and speed over maximizing the window for public accountability.