The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued an order Tuesday granting petitions for en banc rehearing in the consolidated cases *Climate United Fund v. Citibank, N.A.* and *Environmental Protection Agency*, signaling the court's recognition of the matter's substantial legal importance.
The order, filed Dec. 17, 2025, in case numbers 25-5122 and 25-5123, vacates the court's previous judgment issued Sept. 2, 2025, and schedules oral arguments before the full court for 9:30 a.m. on Feb. 24, 2026. The decision comes after a majority of judges eligible to participate voted in favor of the rehearing petitions.
The consolidated cases involve Climate United Fund and other parties as appellees against Citibank, N.A., also an appellee, with the Environmental Protection Agency and Lee M. Zeldin, in his official capacity as EPA Administrator, serving as appellants. The complex procedural posture reflects the multifaceted nature of the dispute, which appears to involve environmental regulations and financial institutions.
The court also granted motions from Members of Congress and Impact Finance Experts to file amicus curiae briefs supporting the rehearing petition. The clerk was directed to file the lodged amicus briefs, indicating significant external interest in the case's outcome from both legislative and industry stakeholders.
En banc review is relatively rare in federal appellate courts, typically reserved for cases of exceptional importance or those involving conflicts with Supreme Court precedent or other circuit decisions. The D.C. Circuit's decision to grant such review suggests the judges believe the case raises issues of significant legal or policy importance that warrant consideration by the full court rather than a three-judge panel.
The order maintains a partial administrative stay that was entered April 16, 2025, keeping certain aspects of the lower court's ruling on hold while the appeal proceeds. This stay indicates that the case involves time-sensitive regulatory or enforcement matters that could have immediate practical consequences if implemented.
According to the court's scheduling order, both the federal appellants (EPA and Administrator Zeldin) and Citibank must file their briefs by Jan. 9, 2026. The parties must submit both electronic filings and 30 paper copies of their briefs and appendices, following standard D.C. Circuit practice for en banc proceedings.
The case appears to involve the intersection of environmental law and financial regulation, given the parties involved. Climate United Fund, as the name suggests, likely represents environmental or climate-focused interests, while Citibank's involvement indicates potential regulatory obligations or disputes affecting major financial institutions.
The EPA's role as appellant suggests the agency is defending its regulatory actions or interpretations against challenges from other parties. Administrator Zeldin's inclusion in his official capacity indicates the dispute involves current EPA policy or enforcement decisions rather than historical matters.
The D.C. Circuit frequently handles cases involving federal agency actions due to its jurisdiction over challenges to federal regulations and administrative decisions. The court's expertise in administrative law makes it a key venue for disputes involving environmental regulations and their implementation.
The timing of the case, with oral arguments scheduled for February 2026, means the en banc court will hear arguments during the early months of a new presidential administration. This timing could affect the EPA's positions or priorities in the case, depending on any policy changes implemented by the incoming administration.
The presence of amicus briefs from Members of Congress and Impact Finance Experts suggests the case has drawn attention from both political and industry observers who view the outcome as potentially precedent-setting for future environmental finance cases.
Circuit Judge Henderson did not participate in the matter, according to the order, though no reason was specified for her recusal. The remaining judges on the court, led by Chief Judge Srinivasan, will comprise the en banc panel.
The case's consolidation with a second matter (case 25-5123) indicates related legal issues are being addressed together, a common practice when multiple cases involve similar legal questions or parties. This consolidation allows the court to address potentially conflicting lower court rulings or related regulatory disputes in a single proceeding.
The court's decision to vacate its previous September judgment and schedule en banc review represents a significant development for all parties involved. En banc proceedings typically result in more definitive precedential rulings that carry greater weight for future cases in the circuit.
The February oral arguments will provide the parties an opportunity to present their positions to the full court, with the ultimate decision likely to have implications for environmental law, financial regulation, and the relationship between federal agencies and private institutions in addressing climate-related policies.