Updates on Challenges to Enbridge Line 3 and Keystone XL; New North Dakota Pipeline Proposed

In this blog:

  • The Progressive Magazine: The Battle Against Line 3: It’s not only a pipeline, it’s the future of the planet
  • Trump’s effort to end-run court challenges to Keystone XL facing more court challenges
  • Phillips 66 and Bridger Pipeline propose new pipeline through North Dakota
  • Line 3 opponents rally at Sen. Klobuchar’s office to get her to take a stand against the pipeline

The Battle Against Line 3: It’s not only a pipeline, it’s the future of the planet

Recent Line 3 protest.

The Progressive Magazine just published an article I wrote analyzing current efforts to stop Enbridge Line 3 in northern Minnesota. It provides the background on the opposition to the project and an update on current legal and permit challenges. Here is the link,

Trump’s effort to end-run Keystone XL court challenges now faces more court challenges

The Keystone XL pipeline has hit roadblocks in court, and President Trump is trying to override them, according to an update published by the Native American Rights Fund (NARF). He is just further complicating matters.

A District Court ruling said the federal government failed to follow the law when it issued its 2017 permit for Keystone XL, NARF reported. The decision blocked pipeline construction until the issues were resolved. The case was on appeal in the Ninth Circuit when President Trump revoked the original KXL pipeline permit and issued a new permit himself. The Appeals Court dismissed the case June 6 as moot. The basis of the lawsuit — the original construction permit — no longer existed.

In effect, that lifted the Keystone XL construction ban.

According to a statement by NARF:

However, for the Tribes, the KXL fight is just beginning. The Fort Belknap Indian Community and the Rosebud Sioux Tribe, represented by the Native American Rights Fund,  have separately sued TC Energy and President Trump—Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Trump.

Regardless of the new permit and political maneuvering, the President is required to honor the treaties and the Constitution. And TC Energy still must abide by federal and tribal law. The case is now up to the Tribes, and they will not allow a foreign company to break American law, take land that does not belong to them, ignore the voices and laws of the tribal citizens, and destroy an aquifer that feeds millions of Americans….

“People must understand that the Ogallala Aquifer that this pipeline will cross covers 8 states and waters 30 percent of American crops. It is the largest underground water source in the United States. And the President and TC Energy would like to run a pipeline of highly toxic, cancer-causing sludge called ‘tar sands’ right through it.  The Tribes are taking a stand for their people, their culture, their water, and their future, but they also are taking a stand for YOU,” said NARF Staff Attorney Natalie Landreth.

In a letter to other Tribal leaders, Rosebud Sioux Tribe President Rodney Bordeaux wrote the following:

We are ensuring that TC Energy (TransCanada) follows and respects our law. We have been mistreated in this process, and TC Energy has never sought or obtained our consent to build a pipeline in our territory, including on lands held in trust by the United States. In granting a permit for the pipeline, the President has ignored his obligation to protect the Rosebud Sioux Tribe in direct violation of the Fort Laramie Treaties of 1851 and 1868, ignored federal right of way and mineral statutes, and ignored basic principles of federal Indian law.

There are currently three major tar sands crude oil pipelines proposed: Enbridge Line 3, Keystone XL and Trans Mountain, a project that would run from Alberta to British Columbia. All three need to be stopped.

Phillips 66 and Bridger Pipeline propose new pipeline through North Dakota

Phillips 66 and Bridger Pipeline are proposing a $1.6 billion crude oil pipeline would start in Wyoming, connect with the oil fields in western North Dakota, and end in an Oklahoma terminal, according to an AP story published in Yahoo.. From there, it could be shipped to Gulf ports.

The pipeline would run west of the Dakota Access Pipeline, carrying 350,000 barrels of oil per day.

Line 3 opponents rally at Sen. Klobuchar’s office to get her to take a stand against the pipeline

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a middle-of-the-road democrat running for president, is under pressure at home over her silence on the Enbridge Line 3 tar sands crude oil pipeline,” according to a Friday story posted by E&E News.

Klobuchar has not taken a position on Enbridge Line 3, but has stated her support for the legislation to boost renewable energy and increase energy efficiency.

According to the story, activists rallied at Klobuchar’s Minneapolis office Friday, “submitting a letter signed by 1,300 Minnesota constituents asking her to ‘support a complete elimination of fossil fuels as part of the progressive climate policy.'”

“There’s no room in the Green New Deal for the giant, polluting Line 3 pipeline,” Abigayle Reese, an organizer with Friends of the Earth Minnesota, said in a statement. “A Green New Deal that eliminates fossil fuels is the only solution that matches the size and scope of the climate crisis we face.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s