Indian country pipelines

Fort Peck Tribe Sues Interior over Keystone XL Pipeline

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint in Assiniboine and Sioux Tribes of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation v. Dept. of the Interior (D. Mont.):

1 Complaint

IPR: “Emails show Enbridge private security keeping tabs on activists in the Straits of Mackinac”

Monica Williamson

Here.

“The fact that myself and other elected leaders of tribes have taken a stance against the pipeline doesn’t mean that our law enforcement agencies don’t have an interest in understanding what’s going on at the Straits with the pipeline,” says Bryan Newland, Chairman of the Bay Mills Indian Community. “It would be just like Enbridge reaching out to the Michigan State Police despite the fact that our attorney general and governor are opposed to the pipeline in the straits.”

—

Kyle Whyte is a professor at Michigan State University and a citizen of the Citizen Potawatomi Nation who has written about Standing Rock. He says there’s a trend of companies trying to control public advocacy behind the scenes.

“Instead of companies proposing risky projects being subject to oversight, it’s citizens concerned about preventing risks who are subject to oversight from those seeking to impose the risks,” he says. “There is a problem of mutual accountability here.”

Tribal Motions for Summary Judgment in Standing Rock v. Army Corps [Dakota Access Pipeline]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

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

436-1 Cheyenne River Motion for Summary Judgment

439 NCAI Amicus Brief

Tenth Circuit Decides Davilla v. Enable Midstream Partners

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the opinion in Davilla v. Enable Midstream Partners.

Briefs:

appellant brief

appellee brief

reply

Lower court materials here and here.