Dakota Access pipeline: judge rules environmental survey was inadequate

[Suppressed]

Dakota Access pipeline: judge rules environmental survey was inadequate
In what’s being hailed a ‘significant victory’ for pipeline’s opponents, a judge said he would consider whether operations must halt until assessment is redone
Associated Press  Wednesday 14 June 2017 22.03 EDT
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/14/dakota-access-pipeline-environmental-study-inadequate

A federal judge has handed a lifeline to efforts to block the Dakota Access pipeline, ruling Wednesday that the US Army Corps of Engineers did not adequately consider the possible impacts of an oil spill where the pipeline passes under the Missouri River.

US district judge James Boasberg said in a 91-page decision that the corps failed to take into account how a spill might affect “fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice, or the degree to which the pipeline’s effects are likely to be highly controversial”.

The judge said the army must redo its environmental analysis in certain sections and he would consider later whether the pipeline must halt operations in the meantime. A status conference is scheduled for next week.

...

Excerpt.  Read more at https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/14/dakota-access-pipeline-environmental-study-inadequate

[Fishrrman]

A little late for that now.

Appeal this ruling, pronto, and "push it upwards" as far as necessary.

[Just_Victor]

So, the Army Corp of Engineers environmental impact study didn't adequately consider how a spill might effect "environmental justice?"

What does that even mean?

[Smokin Joe]

So, the Army Corp of Engineers environmental impact study didn't adequately consider how a spill might effect "environmental justice?"

What does that even mean?

It means the liberals didn't like the outcome.

The pipeline is 90 feet below the bottom of the lake. In a tunnel drilled for the purpose of keeping the pipeline away from the water for the foreseeable future, even if the dam was breached and the river back in its original channel. Short of nuclear war or a cosmic impact or a liberal judge, it should never have a problem getting oil safely through the pipe in the tunnel.

If the first two happen, we'll have other problems to contend with. The latter is the greatest danger to oil moving safely through the pipeline, because they'll shut it down even if there is nothing wrong.

[Joe Wooten]

This judge was appointed by 0bama and confirmed by every republican in the senate. It was a 96-0 vote, so maybe 4 did not vote for him but were absent or did not vote.

On June 17, 2010, President Barack Obama formally nominated Boasberg to the District Court for the District of Columbia.[8] Boasberg was confirmed on March 14, 2011 by a vote of 96 ayes to 0 nays.[12] He received his commission on March 17, 2011.[9]

[thackney]

A little late for that now.

Appeal this ruling, pronto, and "push it upwards" as far as necessary.

Exactly.  The environmental study has a long and extensive public review process.  It is done.

[catfish1957]

Exactly.  The environmental study has a long and extensive public review process.  It is done.

Don't worry...  some liberal Federal Court Judge will throw an injunction.

[Frank Cannon]

Day late a dollar short. This ruling isn't worth the paper this Commie Pinko used.

[catfish1957]

Day late a dollar short. This ruling isn't worth the paper this Commie Pinko used.

Some liberal fed judge with throw an injunction based on some overlooked Environmental Justice statute. 

Esp. in the past 10 years or so, wording of these have been made vague enough to favor the activists.

[Sanguine]

It's full out war at this point. 

I thought I'd better come back and add to that statement.  What I meant was that the left is engaged in full-out war against America.  Pulling out all stops from the Antifas to unethical judges to angry politicians.

[the_doc]

US district judge James Boasberg said in a 91-page decision that the corps failed to take into account how a spill might affect “fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice, or the degree to which the pipeline’s effects are likely to be highly controversial”.

Okay, so now self-righteous progressives are styling their cause as environmental justice.  And they seem to be tipping their hand of monstrous social and judicial stupidity by expanding the regulatory requirement of environmental impact statements to include the possibility that someone in that "environmental justice" movement might get upset.

(The judge's environmental concerns apparently center on the potential for the project to melt snowflakes.  [I guess that's a global warming thing, too.])

[Smokin Joe]

Okay, so now self-righteous progressives are styling their cause as environmental justice.  And they seem to be tipping their hand of monstrous social and judicial stupidity by expanding the regulatory requirement of environmental impact statements to include the possibility that someone in that "environmental justice" movement might get upset.

(The judge's environmental concerns apparently center on the potential for the project to melt snowflakes.  [I guess that's a global warming thing, too.])

What "fishing rights" What "hunting rights"? Those aren't affected inland, they aren't affected by a pipe 90 feet below the bottom of the lake. The shoreline is controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers, and they have told people who retained their land when the reservoir went in that they have no right during periods of low water to go onto old homesteads on land they own and recover any 'artifact', because those (ancestors' property) are now the property of and under the control of the Corps.

This ruling is horse manure, and the judge is the source, with all that implies about the judge.

[Sanguine]

What "fishing rights" What "hunting rights"? Those aren't affected inland, they aren't affected by a pipe 90 feet below the bottom of the lake. The shoreline is controlled by the Army Corps of Engineers, and they have told people who retained their land when the reservoir went in that they have no right during periods of low water to go onto old homesteads on land they own and recover any 'artifact', because those (ancestors' property) are now the property of and under the control of the Corps.

This ruling is horse manure, and the judge is the source, with all that implies about the judge.

Yes, it's very similar to rulings on Trump's travel ban by judges using fallacious reasoning and dubious jurisdictional authority.  They are at war with us.  What's the saying: "you may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you"?