Here is “Pipeline protesters say they are fighting to protect clean water for 200,000 South Dakotans.”
water rights
Ninth Circuit Oral Argument Video in Agua Caliente v. Coachella Valley Water District
Washington Supreme Court Ruling in Hirst Protects Instream Flows
In this much anticipated opinion, the Washington Supreme Court has ruled that, in violation of state law, Whatcom County did not ensure the existence of adequate water supplies before issuing building permits. The case will protect stream flows from the “death by a thousand cuts” impact of small wells. Many Washington tribes have sought to protect stream flows from these so-called exempt wells. The opinion is here.
Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Grants Administrative Injunction In Standing Rock Sioux v. Army Corps
Here.
ORDERED that Dakota Access LLC be enjoined pending further order of the court from construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline for 20 miles on both sides of the Missouri River at Lake Oahe. The purpose of this administrative injunction is to give the court sufficient opportunity to consider the emergency motion for injunction pending appeal and should not be construed in any way as a ruling on the merits of that motion. See D.C. Circuit Handbook of Practice and Internal Procedures 33 (2016).
Pleadings here.
Map here.
Standing Rock v. Army Corps Update: Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal
Kickapoo Indian Reservation Water Right Settlement Agreement
Download (PDF): Settlement Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding
Links:
Kan. Dept. of Agriculture
Kansas Reaches Water Rights Agreement With Kickapoo Tribe (9/9/16)
Kickapoo Indian Reservation Water Right Settlement Agreement (9/14/16)
Gabe Galanda’s Interview on Pipeline Protest with Seattle Public Radio
D. N.M. Denies Motion to Amend Judgment in Water Rights Settlement
Here are the materials in the matter of New Mexico et al v. Aamodt el al, 66-cv-00639 (D. N.M. Sept. 9, 2016):
Doc. 10543 – Memorandum Opinion and Order Approving Settlement Agreement
Doc. 10567 – Opposed Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment Pursuant to Rule 59(e)
Doc. 10632 – Reply in Support of Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment Pursuant to Rule 59(e)
Feds Deny Approval of Construction of the DAPL on Lands that Border Lake Oahe [corrected headline]
Here is the United States’ press release:
JOINT STATEMENT FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, THE DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY AND THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR REGARDING STANDING ROCK SIOUX TRIBE V. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
WASHINGTON – The Department of Justice, the Department of the Army and the Department of the Interior issued the following statement regarding Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers:
“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. Therefore, the Department of the Army, the Department of Justice, and the Department of the Interior will take the following steps.
“The Army will not authorize constructing the Dakota Access pipeline on Corps land bordering or under Lake Oahe until it can determine whether it will need to reconsider any of its previous decisions regarding the Lake Oahe site under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) or other federal laws. Therefore, construction of the pipeline on Army Corps land bordering or under Lake Oahe will not go forward at this time. The Army will move expeditiously to make this determination, as everyone involved — including the pipeline company and its workers — deserves a clear and timely resolution. In the interim, we request that the pipeline company voluntarily pause all construction activity within 20 miles east or west of Lake Oahe.
“Furthermore, 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.
“Finally, we fully support the rights of all Americans to assemble and speak freely. We urge everyone involved in protest or pipeline activities to adhere to the principles of nonviolence. Of course, anyone who commits violent or destructive acts may face criminal sanctions from federal, tribal, state, or local authorities. The Departments of Justice and the Interior will continue to deploy resources to North Dakota to help state, local, and tribal authorities, and the communities they serve, better communicate, defuse tensions, support peaceful protest, and maintain public safety.
“In recent days, we have seen thousands of demonstrators come together peacefully, with support from scores of sovereign tribal governments, to exercise their First Amendment rights and to voice heartfelt concerns about the environment and historic, sacred sites. It is now incumbent on all of us to develop a path forward that serves the broadest public interest.”
Turtle Talk 
You must be logged in to post a comment.