Major litigation filed by Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity, National Wildlife Federal and First Nation groups against Enbridge Pipeline and the Department of State over a cross border pipeline expansion has just been dismissed by a federal district court in Minnesota.
The Federal Court determined that it did not have jurisdiction to review a presidential decision interpreting certain maintenance and expansion activity by Enbridge on its Line 3 and Alberta Clipper system. The Department of State and Enbridge opposed the environmental Plaintiff’s civil action claiming the Department of State conduct as presidential actions was not reviewable under the Administrative Procedures Act and under constitutional separation of powers. This meant the federal judge was without jurisdiction to review or affect the decision of the Department of State. Enbridge and the Department of State won their motions to dismiss with prejudice against the environmental plaintiff’s civil action.
The Department of State had a motion to strike the Plaintiff’s pleadings for articulating an erroneous legal case for federal court action on an action deemed by the Secretary of State to be Presidential in nature.
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Industry/2015/12/10/Is-Enbridge-pipeline-the-next-Keystone/1501449752917/
The UPI link contains the text of the judge’s decision.
See also this news coverage:
http://www.duluthnewstribune.com/news/3900125-judge-wont-stop-enbridge-cross-border-oil-flow
http://www.theprovince.com/business/judge+rejects+challenge+enbridges+alberta+clipper+pipeline/11580553/story.html
http://www.startribune.com/cross-border-pipeline-switch-allowing-more-canadian-crude-into-minnesota-is-legal-judge-rules/361322511/
This illustrates that federal anti-cross-border pipeline litigation is a waste of time because it is legally futile and unfounded, and that environmental groups filing such litigation do not accomplish any any greenhouse gas emission control or reduction, or progress in addressing global warming and climate change, by filing such litigation or promoting it through news releases.