Supreme Court Limits NEPA Overreach and Scientists Resurrect Extinct Dire Wolves

On July 10, 2025, natural resources expert Greg Walcher examined a landmark Supreme Court ruling that curbs environmental law overreach, then explored the ethical questions surrounding scientists who have resurrected extinct dire wolves. Constitutional scholar Rob Natelson took listener questions on Supreme Court decisions and the legal system.

Supreme Court Reins In NEPA Abuse

Start listening at 32:38 – Hour 1

Greg Walcher breaks down a unanimous Supreme Court decision that limits how the National Environmental Policy Act can be used to block projects. The case involved Utah’s proposed 80-mile rail line, which was challenged by Eagle County, Colorado, on speculation that oil might someday be transported through the county. The Court ruled that agencies cannot be forced to consider every hypothetical downstream consequence of their decisions.

Walcher explains that NEPA was designed to ensure environmental impacts are considered, not to provide a tool for stopping all development. The ruling represents a significant course correction after decades of environmental law being weaponized to delay infrastructure projects indefinitely. The Rueter-Hess Reservoir in Colorado, he notes, took 30 years to gain approval.

“So if somebody, if some Australian process decides that they want to recreate Tasmanian tigers and repopulate, you know, what mankind killed off, whether that was a wise decision or not, my point is just somebody ought to decide that other than a researcher in a lab.”

Greg Walcher, Natural Resources Policy Expert

De-Extinction Raises Ethical Questions

Start listening at 48:10 – Hour 1

Walcher reveals that Harvard geneticist George Church’s team has successfully created three living dire wolf cubs, a species extinct for 30,000 years. Using DNA extracted from ancient remains, scientists have crossed a technological threshold that could enable recreation of woolly mammoths, Tasmanian tigers, and potentially more dangerous species.

The dire wolf, standing four feet at the shoulder and eight feet long, poses obvious dangers if released. Yet Church’s team is already discussing releasing them on indigenous lands without any public input. Walcher argues this capability demands a democratic process for deciding which species to resurrect, rather than leaving such consequential decisions to individual researchers.

“Okay, does some Harvard professor by himself get to decide if we want to recreate velociraptors?”

Greg Walcher, Author of Smoking Them Out

Constitutional Questions from Listeners

Start listening at 72:58 – Hour 2

Rob Natelson launches a new monthly feature answering listener questions about constitutional law. The constitutional scholar, whose research has been cited by the Supreme Court, explained how the federal court system works, with the Supreme Court being the only constitutionally mandated court while all others are created by Congress.

Caller Ben Williams asked whether laws passed by fraudulently elected officials could be invalidated. Natelson explained that while election challenges are extremely difficult to win, requiring clear evidence that fraud determined the outcome, courts generally uphold official acts under the de facto corporation doctrine. The question of invalidating an entire term’s legislation remains largely untested.

“The district courts, remember, we mentioned this earlier, were set up by Congress. They were not given the powers to issue universal injunctions.”

Rob Natelson, Constitutional Scholar

Universal Injunctions Struck Down

Start listening at 102:49 – Hour 2

Natelson addressed the Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Casa, which struck down universal injunctions against Trump’s birthright citizenship executive order. District courts had ordered the president not to enforce the order against anyone nationwide, not just the plaintiffs. The Supreme Court ruled this exceeded congressional authority granted to district courts, which can only issue relief to parties before them unless a case qualifies as a class action.

The ruling curbs a practice where individual district judges could effectively block national policy. Natelson called it a worthy slapdown of overreaching judges and predicted similar rulings would follow for other activist injunctions.

“We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”

Abraham Lincoln, as quoted by Kim Monson