The question for the justices was whether an agency had complied with a federal law by issuing a 3,600-page report on the impact of a proposed railway in Utah.

The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on Thursday that a federal agency had done enough to consider the environmental impact of a proposed 88-mile railway in Utah. The ruling limits the scope of environmental reviews required by federal law in all sorts of settings.

The proposed railway would connect oil fields in the Uinta Basin in northeast Utah to a national rail network that runs next to the Colorado River and then to refineries on the Gulf Coast.

Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, writing for five justices, said that many lower courts had dictated that the environmental impact statements required by a 1970 federal law, the National Environmental Policy Act, be needlessly elaborate.

“The goal of the law,” he wrote, “is to inform agency decision making, not

Keep reading this article on The New York Times Energy & Environment.