In a 91-page decision, Judge James Boasberg ruled that the federal permits authorizing the pipeline to cross the Missouri River just upstream of the Standing Rock reservation, which were hastily issued by the Trump administration just days after the inauguration, violated the law in certain critical respects.
The Court did not determine whether pipeline operations should be shut off and has requested additional briefing on the subject and a status conference next week.
The federal judge wrote, “the Court agrees that [the Corps] did not adequately consider the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice, or the degree to which the pipeline’s effects are likely to be highly controversial.”
“This is a major victory for the Tribe and we commend the courts for upholding the law and doing the right thing,” said Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault II. “The previous administration painstakingly considered the impacts of this pipeline, and President Trump hastily dismissed these careful environmental considerations in favor of political and personal interests. We applaud the courts for protecting our laws and regulations from undue political influence, and will ask the Court to shut down pipeline operations immediately.”
“This decision marks an important turning point. Until now, the rights of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe have been disregarded by the builders of the Dakota Access Pipeline and the Trump administration—prompting a well-deserved global outcry,” said Earthjustice attorney Jan Hasselman. “The federal courts have stepped in where our political systems have failed to protect the rights of Native communities.”
The Court ruled against the Tribe on several other issues, finding that the reversal allowing the pipeline complied with the law in some respects.
Read today’s court opinion. Read full news release.
About The Litigation:
Why did the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe bring a lawsuit?
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is deeply concerned about the construction of the major crude-oil pipeline that passes through its ancestral lands.
What are the key legal issues in this case?
The motion for summary judgment, filed on Feb. 14, asked the Judge to rule on major legal questions that have not yet been resolved during this case, including whether National Environmental Policy Act requirements have been met and whether the Corps’ actions violate the Tribe’s Treaty rights.
Our lawsuit raises three critical claims, and asks the court to throw out the federal approvals.
First, the law requires a full, transparent and public environmental review for any federal action that has “significant” environmental effects. These environmental reviews have been prepared for decisions as mundane as off-leash dog areas and allowing jet skis in parks. The idea that a 30-inch crude-oil pipeline under one of the most economically and culturally important waterways in the nation isn’t significant enough to warrant an environmental review is absurd.
Second, the history of the U.S. government’s broken promises to the Sioux people is long and tragic. No one disputes that the Tribe has important Treaty rights that guarantee the integrity of its reservation. This means that the federal government and its agencies cannot take any federal action that harms the Standing Rock reservation or the water in the Missouri River on which the people of Standing Rock depend.
The Obama administration made a carefully considered decision that these Treaty rights needed to be respected in connection with an oil pipeline immediately upstream of the reservation. The Trump administration ignored that advice, and acted as if the Tribe does not exist.
And finally, there are limits on the extent to which one administration can reverse the decisions of its predecessor. While federal agencies can change their minds about matters of policy, the courts will set aside reversals that are not fully justified and explained.
http://earthjustice.org/features/faq-standing-rock-litigation#.WUHdrXiV6Y0.email