Law Commons^™

Does The Constitution Allow Private Companies To Use Eminent Domain Against A State? Penn East Pipeline Co., Llc V. New Jersey, Crystal J. Anthony

Ocean and Coastal Law Journal

In 2021 the United States Supreme Court decided in the case PennEast Pipeline Co. v. New Jersey that Section 717(h) of the Natural Gas Act authorized the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to delegate the government’s eminent domain power to private companies. The Court’s decision allows a private company to condemn all “necessary rights-of-way,” whether privately-owned or state-owned land. This case note explores the history of the government’s eminent domain power and the states’ Eleventh Amendment immunity from lawsuits. The majority opinion in PennEast reasoned that the states waived their sovereign immunity at the ratification of the Constitution. Thus, according …

Taking From States: Sovereign Immunity's Preclusive Effect On Private Takings Of State Land, Jennifer Danis, Michael Bloom

Sabin Center for Climate Change Law

The core of a state is its physical presence and dominion over its land. States are now battling to maintain their dignity as sovereigns, while traditional tools essential to federalism risk erosion. Private actors, ostensibly empowered by the federal government to condemn land through eminent domain, threaten state sovereignty by attempting to take state property without consent. Select federal statutes, such as the Natural Gas Act and Federal Power Act, grant eminent domain power to private companies to take property for public use. Without proper limiting principles, a statute granting such power could allow a private corporation to condemn and …

Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Analise Nuxoll

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Refining Statutory Interpretation: How Natural Gas Export Regulations Violate U.S. International Trade Obligations, Amanda L. Tharpe

Catholic University Law Review

As a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the United States is required to abide by nondiscriminatory trade policies when exporting products to other WTO members. Current U.S. policy regulating natural gas exports impose burdensome and lengthy licensing procedures on those requesting approval of a permit to export natural gas to countries with which the U.S. does not have a free trade agreement. A similar commodity, crude oil, is regulated by different regulations that allow for U.S. oil producers to freely export crude oil overseas. This Comment analyzes the differences in federal laws and regulations governing the export of …

Oneok, Inc. V. Learjet, Inc., Keatan J. Williams

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In an ongoing dispute, the Supreme Court has allowed retail natural gas purchasers to bring state law anti-trust claims against natural gas pipelines for price manipulation. While holding that the Natural Gas Act does not create field pre-emption over these claims, the opinion hinted that there might still be conflict pre-emption. Justice Scalia, in his dissent, argued forcefully that the majority had misapplied and misconstrued the applicable case law, which, he argued, clearly created field pre-emption.

Newfoundland Generic Royalty Regime, Jack Thrasher

Dalhousie Law Journal

This paper reviews the regulations under the Newfoundland and Labrador Petroleum and Natural Gas Act governing the Newfoundland generic royalty regime. The author also points to some unresolved issues; in particular he discusses transportation costs and the parameters of ministerial discretion.

Off-System Sales – Will They Ever Return? (The Interstate Side), Robert C. Mchugh

Natural Gas Symposium: Contract Solutions for the Future of Regulatory Environment (March 24-25)

27 pages (includes illustrations).

Contains 2 pages of references.

Contains 1 attachment.

The Natural Gas Industry In Transition, Ruth A. Maurer

Natural Gas Symposium: Contract Solutions for the Future of Regulatory Environment (March 24-25)

10 pages (includes illustrations).

The Deregulation Of Industry: A Built-In Bias, David S. Schwartz

Indiana Law Journal

Colloquium: The Deregulation of Industry

The Federal Power Commission Does Not Have Jurisdiction Over The Sale Of A Developed Leasehold Interest Of Gas In Formation-Marr V. Fpc, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Independent gas producers erected producing wells upon certain land to extract leased mineral interests. This development of the leasehold supplied geological information from which the amount of gas reserves was estimated. The gas leasehold was then sold to Texas Eastern Transmission Company, an interstate pipeline company that sought additional reserves. Texas Eastern applied to the Federal Power Commission for a certificate of public convenience and necessity to connect its transportation system to the field. The FPC asserted jurisdiction over the sale of the leasehold in order to investigate the cost aspects of the transaction. Because the details of the sale …

Administrative Law-Rate-Making-Authority Of Fpc To Limit Rate Of Return On Tax Reserves Resulting From Liberalized Depreciation, Harry T. Edwards

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff, a natural gas pipeline company, filed a petition for review of a Federal Power Commission ruling in a rate proceeding under section 4(e) of the Natural Gas Act. Plaintiff argued that Congress did not intend tax deferrals arising from liberalized depreciation to be shared by producers and consumers and that, consequently, accumulated tax reserves should be included in the company's rate base at an ordinary rate of return. The FPC ruled that the petitioner could include its tax reserves in the rate base, but that the rate of return on the reserves would be limited to one and one-half …

Administrative Law - Procedure - Consideration Of Initial Rate In Natural Gas Act Sale Certification, Robert Jillson

Michigan Law Review

In a Natural Gas Act sale certification proceeding the Federal Power Commission twice refused to issue an unconditional certificate, finding public convenience and necessity unproved because the unprecedented initial contract rate was not "shown to be in the public interest." Applicants declined to present evidence of the reasonableness of the initial contract rate. A commission proposal to certify at a lower rate, with increase to the contract price after twenty-four hours of delivery but under the public protection provisions of section 4 of the act, was refused. After being informed that the applicants would not dedicate the gas to the …

Control Of Entry Into The Natural Gas Pipeline Industry: The Fpc And The Certificate Of Convenience And Necessity

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

State Regulation Of Interstate Pipelines-Natural Gas Act

Indiana Law Journal

Constitutional Law Note

The Demise Of Fair Value, Robert W. Harbeson

Michigan Law Review

Two years ago, in discussing the Natural Gas Pipeline Company case, the writer ventured the opinion that "while it cannot be stated with certainty that the decision marks the demise of that hardy perennial--fair value--since the majority opinion did not explicitly repudiate that doctrine," there was language which indicated that such would nevertheless be the result of the decision. This prophecy now appears to be substantiated by the decision of the Supreme Court on January 3, 1944, in Federal Power Commission v. Hope Natural Gas Company. In the Pipeline Company case Chief Justice Stone stated significantly that "the Constitution …