Federal government moves to halt oil pipeline construction near Standing Rock Sioux tribal land
Federal government moves to halt oil pipeline construction near Standing Rock Sioux tribal land By Joe Heim and Mark Berman September 9 at 7:15 PM
Federal Judge ruled against a Native American tribe seeking an injunction on a pipeline under construction in North Dakota. The anti-pipeline protest has become a rallying point for Native Americans across the United States. Here's what you need to know. (Daron Taylor/The Washington Post)
A federal judge ruled Friday against the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s request for a preliminary injunction to halt construction on the Dakota Access crude oil pipeline that the tribe says endangers sacred burial grounds and could threaten its water supply from Lake Oahe, a dammed section of the Missouri river.
But in a development that stunned even the tribe’s lawyers, the decision by District Judge James E. Boasberg was effectively put on hold by a federal order to stop construction near the tribe’s reservation until the Army Corps of Engineers can revisit its previous decisions in the disputed portion.
The tribe’s lawyers had argued that the Army Corps of Engineers had not properly consulted with the tribe on questions of environmental impact and historical preservation as required by law. Boasberg found that the corps had complied with the law in approving permits for the pipeline and that the tribe had not demonstrated that “irreparable harm will ensure.”
Within minutes of Boasberg’s ruling, however, the departments of Justice, Army and Interior issued an unusual joint statement related to the disputed land. Thousands of Native Americans have camped out nearby in protest, and the showdown between tribe members and construction workers had grown increasingly tense.
“We appreciate the District Court’s opinion on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act. However, important issues raised by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and other tribal nations and their members regarding the Dakota Access pipeline specifically, and pipeline-related decision-making generally, remain,” read the joint statement issued by the Justice, Army and Interior departments.
“This case has highlighted the need for a serious discussion on whether there should be nationwide reform with respect to considering tribes’ views on these types of infrastructure projects. Therefore, this fall, we will invite tribes to formal, government-to-government consultations on two questions: (1) within the existing statutory framework, what should the federal government do to better ensure meaningful tribal input into infrastructure-related reviews and decisions and the protection of tribal lands, resources, and treaty rights; and (2) should new legislation be proposed to Congress to alter that statutory framework and promote those goals.”
The fight is being waged over a 1,172-mile pipeline through four states that could transport more than a half-million barrels of oil each day.
For tribal leaders, the government’s announcement immediately following the court’s ruling against it was a huge victory.
“Our hearts are full; this an historic day for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and for tribes across the nation,” said Dave Archambault II, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.“Native peoples have suffered generations of broken promises and today the federal government said that national reform is needed to better ensure that tribes have a voice on infrastructure projects like this pipeline.”
A spokeswoman for Dakota Access declined to comment for this article. A collection of business organizations supporting the pipeline, the MAIN Coalition, said the government’s action halting constructionwas “deeply troubling and could have a long-lasting chilling effect on private infrastructure development in the United States.”
In July, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The complaint said that the Dakota Access Pipeline, or DAPL, could discharge materials “at multiple locations in the tribe’s ancestral lands” without proper permitting.
Tribal leaders have argued that leaks from the pipeline would impact the Missouri River, a source of water for 8,000 residents of a reservation about a mile away from where the pipeline would cross.
In addition, the complaint said that the pipeline “crosses areas of great historical and cultural significance to the tribe, the potential damage or destruction of which greatly injures the tribe and its members.”
Boasberg had partially granted an order in the case in advance of today’s ruling.
The Army Corps of Engineers said in a filing this week that it did not oppose a motion for a temporary restraining order until Boasberg ruled. In that filing, the agency said it believed that it “fulfilled its statutory responsibilities” and felt it would win out. But the corps added that due to the confrontations stemming from the project, the restraining order would essentially be “preserving peace” until a ruling came down.
Dakota Access has said that underground oil pipelines are safe. On its website , the company says that it will take precautions to safeguard culturally or environmentally sensitive areas.
The showdown in North Dakota has also blossomed into a larger fight that has drawn thousands of Native Americans from across the country, joining to combat what they describe as mistreatment in the case.
When workers recently plowed under locations mentioned by the tribe in a court filing as being sacred or historic, tribe members tried to intercede and were stopped by private security workers, some using guard dogs and pepper spray. The resulting photos showed snarling dogs lunging at protesters; a tribal spokesman said demonstrators were bitten, while the sheriff’s department said private security guards as well as dogs were also hurt.
The protest has made headlines around the world, and while overseas this week, President Obama was questioned about the ongoing standoff by a young Malaysian woman at a town hall in Laos.
She asked what Obama could do “to ensure the protection of ancestral land and the supply of clean water, and also environmental justice is upheld?” He did not address the pipeline directly, but acknowledged that “the way that Native Americans were treated was tragic.”
Many tribal leaders say Obama has done more for Native Americans in his two terms than all of his predecessors combined. The administration has given land back to tribes and worked one-on-one with tribal governments, and it is cracking down on crime in Indian Country. “The best thing that’s happened to Indian Country has been President Obama being elected,” said Archambault II, after the president and First Lady Michelle Obama visited Standing Rock in 2014.
Obama said later that they emerged from a private conversation at a school in Cannon Ball, N.D., “shaken because some of these kids were carrying burdens no young person should ever have to carry. And it was heartbreaking.”
Tags
Who is online
672 visitors
“We appreciate the District Court’s opinion on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act. However, important issues raised by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and other tribal nations and their members regarding the Dakota Access pipeline specifically, and pipeline-related decision-making generally, remain,” read the joint statement issued by the Justice, Army and Interior departments.
What a surprising outcome. This sounds like a win for our Native Americans and North Dakota.
It was a stunner, when the Corps, DOJ and DOI came together on this.
A bit of a hint was that Corps actually were in favor of the injunction to stop the pipeline for safety and other reason.
It's not only NA's, but there were many farmers and ranchers that supported and in some cases filed lawsuits to stop the pipeline on the TOR that was filed last Saturday.
We shall see how this proceeds now.
In another note, the Cheyenne River Sioux filed a separate lawsuit yesterday against DAPL.
The wording by both Judge Boasberg in his written decision was interesting.
The wording by the DOA, DOI and DOJ in their full release was equally interesting. They were pointed in their support of 1st amendment and the peaceful protests.
Yes, this is a start and we don't know exactly what the outcome will be but for whatever the reason it has brought attention to the issue and has acknowledged the importance of having input from those impacted. I'm encouraged.
Native peoples have suffered generations of broken promises and today the federal government said that national reform is needed to better ensure that tribes have a voice on infrastructure projects like this pipeline.”
Personally I wouldn't count my chickens before they hatched. Note that this is a sore in the election, and it will be put off until after the election. I hope some of you can understand what I'm talking about. I hope it all works out though.
Benghazi was a sore in the election and only after the election did we find more of the truth.
Obamacare was a sore in the election and only after the election have we found out much more about Obamacare.
I wouldn't expect Hillary or Trump to stop the pipeline. Hillary even has funds donated to her campaign from the company responsible for the pipeline.
This is the suit:
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe vs U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
It's long, but they have so many good arguments against the pipeline.
This has come about at a good time, but I'm concerned there isn't enough time, because after the election all bets are off.
Bakken Pipelines and more:
I found this today on Facebook, and forgot to publish it earlier: