Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Vecinos Para El Bienestar De La Comunidad Costera V. Ferc, Malcolm M. Gilbert
Vecinos Para El Bienestar De La Comunidad Costera V. Ferc, Malcolm M. Gilbert
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The D.C. Circuit Court remanded three Brownsville, TX LNG approval orders to FERC for failing to adequately explain conclusions around environmental justice and climate concerns. The Court ordered FERC to reevaluate whether the projects are in the public interest. The LNG terminals and pipeline will disproportionately impact low-income, minority communities, and substantial greenhouse gas emissions from production and export will contribute to anthropogenic climate change. This case note explores the role that environmental justice and climate change play in federal agency decision-making processes, analyzes the legal framework for the Court's decision, and discusses how the outcome of this litigation could …
Indigenous Environmental Network And North Coast Rivers Alliance V. President Donald J. Trump, Et Al. And Tc Energy Corporation, Et Al., Kirsten D. Gerbatsch Ms.
Indigenous Environmental Network And North Coast Rivers Alliance V. President Donald J. Trump, Et Al. And Tc Energy Corporation, Et Al., Kirsten D. Gerbatsch Ms.
Public Land & Resources Law Review
A single cross-border pipeline project has been the epicenter of environmental litigation for the last decade—and it is not over yet. For years, TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy have sought to construct and maintain a segment of the Keystone pipeline between the United States and Canada to connect existing pipeline infrastructure and transport crude oil. To do so, the company must first apply and be approved for a permit. Between 2008 and 2012, President Obama twice denied TransCanada Keystone Pipeline and TC Energy’s applications. Then, in 2017 and again in 2019, President Trump unilaterally invited TC Energy’s application …
National Wildlife Federation V. Secretary Of The United States Department Of Transportation, Holly A. Seymour
National Wildlife Federation V. Secretary Of The United States Department Of Transportation, Holly A. Seymour
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled in favor of the Department of Transportation in considering whether the district court erred in holding that an agency took a discretionary action when it approved oil spill response plans to a pipeline under the Clean Water Act. The Sixth Circuit reversed the district court’s decision. It held the Department of Transportation does not need to consider the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act requirements in their response plans as long as the Clean Water Act criteria for such plans are met.
Preview—United States Forest Service V. Cowpasture River Preservation Association: Can The Pipeline Cross The Trail?, Alizabeth Bronsdon
Preview—United States Forest Service V. Cowpasture River Preservation Association: Can The Pipeline Cross The Trail?, Alizabeth Bronsdon
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Supreme Court of the United States will hear oral argument in this matter on Monday, February 24, 2020, at 10 a.m. in the Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. Anthony Yang, Assistant to the Solicitor General, will likely argue for the United States. In a divided oral argument, Paul D. Clement will likely appear for Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC, the petitioner in consolidated case No. 18-1587, Atlantic Coast Pipeline, LLC v. Cowpasture River Preservation Association. Michael K. Kellogg will likely appear for the Respondents.
Northern Plains Resource Council V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, Liz M. Forster
Northern Plains Resource Council V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, Liz M. Forster
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Environmental activist and indigenous rights groups have challenged the validity of the Keystone XL Pipeline since its initial approval in 2010. In April 2020, less than a month after crews broke ground, the opposing groups notched a major win when the United States District Court for the District of Montana revoked a key permit for the project on the grounds that the United States Army Corps of Engineers had inadequately assessed the pipeline’s impact on endangered species.
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe V. U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers, Jody D. Lowenstein
Public Land & Resources Law Review
The Standing Rock Sioux’s effort to enjoin the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ permitting of an oil pipeline was stifled by the United States District Court of the District of Columbia. In denying the preliminary injunction, the court held that the Tribe failed to show that the Corps violated the National Historic Preservation Act, and that the Tribe’s belated effort to litigate was futile after failing to participate in the consultation process.
Sierra Club V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, 803 F.3d 31 (D.C. Cir. 2015), Ariel E. Overstreet-Adkins
Sierra Club V. United States Army Corps Of Engineers, 803 F.3d 31 (D.C. Cir. 2015), Ariel E. Overstreet-Adkins
Public Land & Resources Law Review
Despite the majority’s “needlessly circuitous” route, as described by concurring Judge Brown, Sierra Club v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers stands as a limit of the application of NEPA to a private pipeline constructed largely on private land. While the main issue identified by the District of Columbia Circuit Court was the scope of environmental review required under NEPA, the court also addressed issues dealing with the ESA and the CWA relating to the construction and operation of a pipeline in the Midwest. The court held that under these circumstances, NEPA review was mandated only for those small stretches where …