Here is “Legal gears on Nestle water cases grind slowly in Michigan” from MLive.
Environmental
Briefs in Rosebud Sioux Tribe and Fort Belknap Indian Community v. Trump (Keystone XL)
Here are the briefs on the United States’ and TransCanada’s Motions to Dismiss Rosebud and Fort Belknap’s treaty and jurisdiction claims regarding the Keystone XL Pipeline.
- TransCanada Motion to Dismiss
- US Motion to Dismiss
- Rosebud and Fort Belknap Response
- US Reply
- TransCanada Reply
News coverage here, and more information here. Previous posts on this case are here.
Gizmodo: “The Battle for Bad River”
California Trout & Trout Unlimited v. Hoopa Valley Tribe & FERC Cert Petition
Here:
Question presented:
Do states waive their authority under section 401 of the Clean Water Act if they do not approve or deny a certification request within one year, even when an applicant withdraws and resubmits the request before that one year ends?
Lower court materials here.
UPDATE — cert stage briefs:
Swinomish/Quinault/Suquamish Amicus Brief in Climate Change Litigation in Washington State
Here is the brief in Aji P. v. State of Washington (Wash Ct. App.):
More details on this case here.
Lummi Nation Ceremony to Honor Endangered Southern Resident Orcas
Here.
Tribal Motions for Summary Judgment in Standing Rock v. Army Corps [Dakota Access Pipeline]
Here are the new materials in Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (D.D.C.):
418 DCT Order on Administrative Record
433-2 Standing Rock Motion for Summary Judgment
434-2 Oglala Motion for Summary Judgment
435-1 Yankton Motion for Summary Judgment
Nebraska SCT Affirms State Commission’s Decision to Approve Keystone XL Route
Here is the opinion in In re Application No. OP-0003:
High Country News: “The legacy of colonialism on public lands created the Mauna Kea conflict”
Here.
Freep Article on Back 40 Mine
As a side note, the Indian Law Clinic got to work on parts of this issue a few years back, and this article nicely encapsulates how complicated it is, and how dangerous the mine is.
The Michigan-based permitting process for the Back Forty mine has left the Wisconsin side of the river mostly on the sidelines, Cox said.
“When the EPA, the Army Corps, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service all take actions that are federal, they are obligated to consult with the tribe under laws such as the National Historic Preservation Act, the National American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act,” he said.
“(Michigan) gets to contend, ‘Nope, we’re the authority now, so we’re not obligated to do anything with you Indian nations — you independent, sovereign nations. We’ll send you a letter, let you know what we’re doing. But we won’t communicate with you directly.’ “
Cox questioned Michigan’s “strange-sounding process” of leaving so many things unresolved in the approved permit.
“You would think that, rather than try to conditionalize a permit to include all that’s required, you would just say, ‘We’re not going to issue this permit until all of these big things are addressed, like groundwater modeling,'” he said. “I guess in Michigan they don’t see it that way.”
Across the river, in Michigan’s Menominee County, the board of commissioners passed a resolution opposing the Back Forty mine back in 2017.
“It’s right on the river, 150 feet from the Menominee River,” board vice chairman William Cech said. “There’s never really been a successful sulfide mine without leaving a large stain on the landscape that they are digging in
You must be logged in to post a comment.