The California Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to review a key case regarding funding for the bullet train, eliminating one of the project’s biggest legal hurdles and allowing construction to begin.

Eleven months ago, a Sacramento Superior Court judge stunned supporters of the Los Angeles-to-San Francisco rail line when he blocked the California High-Speed Rail Authority from selling $8.6 billion in bonds that voters had approved for the train, leaving almost all the project’s funding in limbo.

So when the Sacramento-based 3rd District Court of Appeal ordered Judge Michael Kenny to vacate his decision, it was a huge victory for the rail authority and Gov. Jerry Brown, one of the project’s biggest champions.

The appellate decision will now stand, and it appears the oft-derided “train to nowhere” is finally headed somewhere.

“This decision removes the cloud regarding allegations that we weren’t doing things properly,” said Jeff Morales, the rail authority’s CEO. “It means we can go out and sell the bonds and get this system built.”

The justices’ decision came during their weekly closed-door conference and was made public without comment. Justice Marvin Baxter was the only member of the seven-member court who voted to hear the case.

Morales said the nearly unanimous decision not to take up the case was a “strong statement” that validates the authority’s work on the project.

Before Kenny’s ruling, construction of the project was set to begin early this year. Demolition work is already underway to clear land for a 29-mile stretch of track in and around Fresno. By 2017, that portion of the rail line is projected to stretch 130 miles and connect Madera to Bakersfield.

Morales said Wednesday’s decision means the pace of other construction work required before tracks are built will speed up dramatically. And earlier this year, the Legislature agreed to a steady source of bullet train funding — a portion of cap-and-trade revenues collected annually from the state’s worst polluters.

At issue in the legal case was whether the rail authority followed a sweeping set of stringent rules for selling the bonds approved by voters in 2008 to begin construction of the project, which state officials now estimate will cost $68 billion.

Last month, opponents of the project had filed a petition urging the state Supreme Court to take up the case. They argued that the appellate court’s decision that the authority’s finance committee acted properly last year when it voted to approve the issuance of the bonds had dismantled century-old legal precedents on the “enforceability” of voter-approved bond measures.

An attorney representing the project’s opponents said he was disappointed in the state Supreme Court’s decision not to take up the case and accused the justices of failing to respect the initiative process.

Still, attorney Michael Brady vowed that his clients’ crusade to stop the project isn’t over. He noted that lawsuits contesting the bullet train’s estimated trip time and whether it can operate without a subsidy — other strict requirements of the 2008 ballot initiative that approved the bonds — are set to go to trial in early 2015.

“We will continue contesting this project,” Brady said. “The problems and deficiencies have not been cured.”

Staff writer Howard Mintz contributed to this report. Contact Jessica Calefati at 916-441-2101. Follow her at Twitter.com/calefati. Read the Political Blotter at IBAbuzz.com/politics.