Court to hear challenge to biased policing of water protectors during Line 3 construction

Corrections: An earlier version of this post misidentified Winona LaDuke’s attorney. She is being represented by Frank Bibeau and Claire Glenn. It also failed to list all of the open cases against LaDuke, which have been added.

One of the hallmarks of this country’s democratic experiment is our aspiration for an impartial justice system, so it’s inexplicable how Minnesota leaders deployed law enforcement against water protectors who opposed the Enbridge Line 3 tar sands pipeline in the manner that they did.

The problem started with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC), but other leaders remained silent.

The PUC approved a scheme allowing Enbridge — a multi-billion dollar, multi-national Canadian company — to fund state and local law enforcement agencies to monitor and police water protectors who opposed the pipeline.

The PUC created a Public Safety Escrow Account. Enbridge funded it. Law enforcement agencies submitted bills for their Line 3-related expenses.

It created bias in the justice system, giving law enforcement financial incentives to focus on, and go after, water protectors.

The scheme finally is getting challenged in court.

How local law enforcement became Enbridge’s security during the construction of its Line 3 pipeline

It was a last-minute decision with no deliberation

Eight people were arrested at a January Line 3 action. Photo: Tom Thompson

Police and sheriff’s offices should be free of outside influences and treat citizens without prejudice.

The state-approved plan that allowed Enbridge to reimburse local law enforcement to provide security for the Line 3 pipeline project undermined that impartiality. The issue has received growing attention; ABC recently ran an article giving it more national exposure.

Many see the funding plan as a conflict of interest. These payouts biased law enforcement in favor of Enbridge and against Indigenous water protectors and their allies. As of early October, the escrow account had doled out $3 million to public safety agencies. More invoices are coming. Some sheriffs offices even billed for routine patrols of Enbridge worksites.

How did this scheme get approved in the first place?

Two Line 3 workers arrested for soliciting sex as part of human trafficking sting

The Duluth News Tribune reported Tuesday that two of the seven people arrested in a northern Minnesota human trafficking sting were Enbridge Line 3 workers, “fueling concern that construction of the oil pipeline is bringing a higher risk of sex crimes to the area.”

Arrested were:

• Michael Kelly West, 53, of Rolla, Missouri, who was charged with one count of carrying a pistol without a permit and one count of solicitation to engage in prostitution.
• Matthew Ty Hall, 33, of Mount Pleasant, Texas, who was charged with one count of solicitation of a person believed to be a minor.

The sting involved web ads that engaged potential customers in sex-for-money conversations, the story said. Perhaps of most concern, West told arresting officers he heard about the ads “from rumors at work.”

That means this isn’t an isolated incident; other workers are talking about it.

[Update: StarTribune story here.]

PUC Commissioner makes strong case against Line 3 plan and strengthens legal cases poised to stop it

Commissioner Matt Schuerger.

After years of research, testimony, organizing, letter writing, pleas, protests, and other public pressure by Indigenous Nations, environmental groups and regular citizens, one Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) Commissioner came around to vote “no” on Enbridge’s proposed Line 3 tar sands pipeline expansion.

Commissioner Matthew Schuerger’s lone “no” vote Monday didn’t change the outcome; the PUC approved Line 3’s Certificate of Need and Route Permit on 3-1 votes. Significantly, however, Schuerger’s arguments will lend credibility to the pending lawsuits seeking to overturn the PUC’s ill-considered decisions.

After Line 3 Vote, Two PUC Commissioners Appear at Comedy Improv Theater, Curtain Falls Early

This Monday, the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) took its final vote approving Enbridge Line 3 crude oil pipeline, the end of a long and painful years’ long process where many people who participated felt they played by the rules and got totally screwed, their voices ignored.

That same evening, PUC Commissioners John Tuma and Dan Lipschultz participated in Bryant Lake Bowl’s “Theater of Public Policy,” which mixes policy wonks with improv comedy. This is how it was supposed to run: Tuma and Lipschultz were there to be interviewed about how the PUC works, then improv actors were supposed to riff a few sketches based on their stories, followed by audience questions.

The booing started before the show opened. The curtain dropped before the improv started. Heated interruptions and pointed questions from the audience shut it down.

Eighteen Criticisms of the PUC’s Approval of the Enbridge Line 3 Tar Sands Pipeline

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) failed Minnesota citizens and Native nations by approving the Enbridge Line 3 tar sands crude oil pipeline through northern Minnesota. The PUC seemed to bend over backwards to favor international corporate interests over Minnesota’s interests. At the same time, it seem to cave into Enbridge’s thinly veiled threat to keep running the old and dangerous Line 3 if the new Line 3 wasn’t approved.

Here are 18 flaws in the PUC’s decision and its process.

PUC Discusses Protests After Line 3 Vote, Police Response and Sex Trafficking

Day Four of the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) deliberations on Enbridge Line 3 included concerns about  possible civil disobedience after the vote, how law enforcement should respond, and plans to mitigate the sex trafficking and drug problems that can follow these large construction projects.