Latest news with #StandingRock
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Federal government appealing $28M award to North Dakota for pipeline protest costs
Opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline camp north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation on Nov. 30, 2016, outside Cannon Ball, N.D. (Photo by) The U.S. Department of Justice is appealing a federal judge's decision to award North Dakota $28 million in damages for the executive branch's response to the Dakota Access Pipeline protests. The case now heads to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals for review. Thousands traveled to south-central North Dakota to protest the construction of the oil pipeline underneath the Missouri River's Lake Oahe reservoir alongside the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in 2016 and 2017. The tribe says the pipeline poses serious threats to the environment, intrudes upon Native territory and has desecrated sacred cultural sites. Judge blasts Army Corps for pipeline protests, orders $28M in damages to North Dakota The main demonstration camp was located on land managed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The state filed suit in 2019 against the federal government, arguing that the Corps unlawfully allowed, and at some times encouraged, protesters to use its land at the state's expense. The case went to trial in February 2024. The trial lasted four weeks and included witness testimony from former North Dakota governors Doug Burgum and Jack Dalrymple, Indigenous activists, law enforcement officials and others. In an April ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Dan Traynor sided with North Dakota's claims, finding the Army Corps at fault for negligence, public nuisance and civil trespass claims. The executive branch has disputed North Dakota's accusations and maintains it did the best it could to manage an unpredictable situation. The U.S. government must file its initial arguments for appeal by Aug. 15, the docket states. North Dakota sought to recoup $38 million from the federal government, though Traynor lowered this amount to $28 million since the U.S. Department of Justice previously gave the state $10 million as compensation for the protests. The state can't get any of the money until the appeals process wraps up, according to the North Dakota Office of Management and Budget. The award would also have to survive review by other judges. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
The Star
01-07-2025
- General
- The Star
'Chicken lady' in US fights for the fowls at her rehabcentre for chickens
Chicken owners from across the Twin Cities have been known to dump fowl on Miranda Meyer's St Paul doorstep in Minnesota, the United States, in the middle of the night. Outside her house on Hatch Avenue – yes, St Paul's 'chicken lady' lives on Hatch Avenue – neighbours stop and watch the birds strut toward feed scattered near Meyer's black hearse. Hens like Sweet Pea, found half-frozen in a bush, ruffle their feathers in a white coop. Meyer's rooster, Jimothy Dean Scrambles, perches on a fence and crows. Minneapolis animal control officials call Meyer, 32, to rehome abandoned chickens. But in her home city, St Paul animal control has issued citations against her flock, exposing her to legal trouble even as she pursues work she considers to be within her rights as a tribal member. Meyer is worried that the fowl troubles will worsen this year. 'We're taking hundreds of birds every summer, and it's only getting bigger and bigger,' Meyer said. 'There's so many people who are going into this blind thinking, 'I just want free eggs'.' When passions hatch Meyer started work in what she called the 'the death industry' at 15. After more than a decade of cleaning crime scenes and preparing burials, dealing with death and silence weighed on her. 'It makes you feel not human because then you can't connect with other people,' Meyer said. But Meyer always felt she could connect with animals, and she said the Standing Rock protests a few years ago inspired a change. Meyer is a member of the Ojibwe tribe whose name, Ikwe Niibawi Wiiji Migizi Miigwan, means 'woman who stands with eagle feather'. She said the protests made her think about sustainability, prompting her to adopt three chickens. She quickly found she had a knack for working with the birds. Chickens rest in a coop built by Meyer. The goal of the operation she runs from her single-family house, the Balsam Lake Bachelor Flock and Poultry Rehab, is to rehabilitate and return chickens and roosters to owners who pay her what they can afford. The rehab runs through her properties in St Paul and Balsam Lake, Wisconsin, and she said the goal is to help chicken owners and people who cannot afford eggs, meat and high veterinary bills. When she can't rehabilitate roosters, Meyer drives them to Balsam Lake and releases them on her 40-acre (16ha) property, or slaughters them to bring meat to neighbours and reservations. Hmong farmers give Meyer leftover vegetables as chicken feed in return for eggs, fertiliser and meat. She donates dozens of fertilised eggs to St Paul school teachers, who hatch them in class and return the chicks to her. The Minneapolis Police Department and Minneapolis Animal Care and Control began phoning for help with chickens abandoned in cemeteries, parking garages and on the tarmac at Minneapolis–St Paul International Airport. Meyer said that up to 20 hens and two roosters now stay with her. But at a peak last year, she said she was accepting 30 roosters a week. That ran her afoul of St Paul Animal Services, which ticketed Meyer last October and again in March for having a rooster and no permit to own chickens. Roosters are prohibited in St Paul, and a rooster permit in Minneapolis costs US$110 (RM466). Meyer disputes the need for a permit, arguing that the work is within her rights as an Ojibwe tribal member with federal protections. Importance in the Hmong community For St Paul resident Va Xiong and others, chickens are crucial for religious ceremonies addressing birth, life and death. Xiong, 42, started raising chickens for the first time this year to provide for his family and their ceremonies. Many Hmong people who emigrated to Minnesota brought cultural practices involving chickens. Xiong explained that the birds are considered guides for spirits of the deceased, wards against sickness and vital nutritional support for women giving birth. Many still believe in those customs but turned from tradition to adjust to city laws, returning chickens to farms after ceremonies instead of sacrificing them. But Xiong said St Paul's restrictions forced him to raise fowl outside the city limits, and he believes residents are being ticketed while holding chickens for similar practices. 'That is why a lot of the Hmong community and Asian communities have these chickens in the city limits, and the city is making it tough for these Asian communities to hold chickens,' Xiong said. He said the permit process can take months. St Paul Animal Services manager Molly Lunaris said most applications are approved the same day, but the department is working to streamline the process through an online application that could be available within a year. Lunaris said rules considered burdensome by some exist for the city's health, safety and liveability. 'We regularly seek staff and resident input to assess whether our ordinances are current, efficient and effective, and work to implement changes when necessary,' Lunaris said in a statement. She said the agency is working to move away from criminal citations in favour of administrative actions. Lunaris added that the agency has not seized any birds claimed to be used for religious purposes and would consult with the City Attorney's Office before doing so. Scores of Minnesotans are turning to co-ops and community -supported agriculture shares to save money on eggs. Many more are turning to backyard chicken coops. Just 27 people applied for a chicken permit in St Paul in 2019. That boomed to 62 people in 2020, and 56 the next year. So far this year, at least 29 people have applied for a permit. Tony Schendel, director of Minneapolis Animal Care and Control, said hundreds of Minneapolitans have chicken permits, and his office receives new applications 'almost every day'. At least 52 residents applied for a chicken permit this year, compared to 74 permit applications through all of 2024. Schendel said local partners are vital to the work. 'These are folks who have a lot of experience handling chickens. They have a lot of background knowledge and they have a proper setup already where they're able to come in, take the chicken from us, place it and then care for it so it's in a proper environment, and then find it a new home,' Schendel said, adding that they receive few complaints about interrupting religious rituals. One of those partners was Mary Britton Clouse. She co-founded Chicken Run Rescue with her husband from their north Minneapolis home in 2001. They moved to Elko in 2016 after running out of space and funds, but Britton Clouse recently moved back to the Twin Cities. She declined to share her new location for fear people might abandon chickens on her property. That's a trend that Britton Clouse has noticed in recent years, and she worries that new owners and animal control officials will be unprepared. 'People think that it's OK to take the unwanted roosters and to drive them to remote areas and leave them there,' Britton Clouse said, calling that 'horribly cruel'. Flying the coop? The 'chicken lady' is tired. Meyer hopes more people support food sovereignty, but said she wants to escape the permit dispute, leave Minnesota, and begin nesting for her first-born son, due this fall. She's considering a homestead in Wisconsin, but wherever she goes, the chickens will flock. 'Honestly if it comes down to my chickens, I ain't getting rid of them at this point. I'm fighting for them, even Woody.' Woody, a chicken known to peck Meyer's legs, clucked in response. 'Yeah,' Meyer affirmed, 'even you!' – By KYELAND JACKSON/The Minnesota Star Tribune/Tribune News Service
Scientific American
30-06-2025
- Politics
- Scientific American
about the Legal Battles around Standing Rock
Rachel Feltman: For Scientific American 's Science Quickly, I'm Rachel Feltman. In 2016 a group of activists who called themselves water protectors—led by members of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe—set up camp on the windswept plains of North Dakota. Their protest against the Dakota Access Pipeline quickly grew into one of the largest Indigenous-led movements in recent U.S. history. At the protest's height more than 10,000 people gathered to stand in defense of water, land and tribal sovereignty. The response? Militarized police, surveillance drones, and a private security firm with war-zone experience—and eventually a sprawling lawsuit that arguably aimed to rewrite the history of Standing Rock. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. My guest today is Alleen Brown. She's a freelance journalist and a senior editor at Drilled, a self-described 'true-crime podcast about climate change.' The latest season of Drilled, which premiered on June 3, digs into the shocking legal battle the pipeline's builder, Energy Transfer, launched against Greenpeace. Thank you so much for coming on to chat with us today. Alleen Brown: Yeah, thank you for having me. Feltman: So for folks who don't remember or maybe weren't paying as much attention as they should've, remind us what the Dakota Access Pipeline is. Brown: Yeah, so the Dakota Access Pipeline is an oil pipeline that travels from kind of the western part of North Dakota to Illinois. And in 2016 and 2017 it was being completed and sort of inspired a big Indigenous-led movement of people who were attempting to stop it. Feltman: Yeah, and what were their motivations for stopping the pipeline? Brown: There were a few motivations. I think the biggest one and most famous one was that the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe was worried about water contamination ... Feltman: Mm. Brown: The pipeline travels underneath the Missouri River, right next to the reservation and not far from where the tribal nation has a water-intake system, so they were really worried about an oil leak. Feltman: Right, and it had actually—the route had been moved from what was initially planned to [in part] avoid that same concern in a predominantly white area; am I remembering that correctly? Brown: Yeah, there were talks early on—one of the routes that was being considered was across the Missouri River upstream from the Bismarck-Mandan community's water-intake system. And so, you know, that's a more urban area that is predominantly white. Feltman: And again, you know, reminding listeners—it has been a very eventful few years [laughs], to be fair—what exactly happened at Standing Rock? You know, this became a big sort of cultural and ecological moment. Brown: Yeah, so to make a long story short, what became known as the Standing Rock movement started with a small group of grassroots people from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe. Eventually the tribe itself got really involved, and what started as kind of a small encampment opposed to the pipeline turned into these sprawling encampments, a sprawling occupation that, at times, had upwards of 10,000 people—people were kind of constantly coming and going. And all of these people were there to stand behind the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and stop the construction of the pipeline under the Missouri River. In response—you know, there was a very heavy-handed response from law enforcement and the pipeline company. So, I think, when a lot of people think of Standing Rock, they think of private security dogs kind of lunging at pipeline opponents who are trying to stop bulldozers. Feltman: Mm. Brown: They think of law enforcement spraying water hoses in below-freezing temperatures at people who are protesting. You know, they might think of tear gas. So it was very, very intense for the people who were there. Feltman: So in the new season of Drilled you're digging into a lawsuit filed by Energy Transfer, the company that built the pipeline, and, you know, folks might be surprised to hear that they sued at all, given that the pipeline was built. It's sort of the opposite direction [laughs] you might expect a lawsuit to be flowing, but then the lawsuit's claims are also very surprising. Could you summarize those for us? Brown: Well, I'm not a lawyer, but I can share what I found in my reporting. I remember when this lawsuit, or another version of this lawsuit, was first filed in 2017—at that time I was working at The Intercept and had been digging into these documents from this private security company, TigerSwan. So I was talking to all kinds of people who had been at Standing Rock and looking at these reports from the private security company. I really didn't hear anything about Greenpeace and this big lawsuit, which started out as a RICO lawsuit—which is [one that regards] the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, designed to go after the Mafia—turned into a conspiracy lawsuit. The lawsuit had Greenpeace at the heart of everything. Feltman: Mm. Brown: The lawsuit was eventually overturned in federal court and refiled in state court in North Dakota, but the damages that they were originally demanding were around $300 million. Ultimately, in that state court case, [the jury] awarded Energy Transfer over $666 million. Feltman: Wow. Could you tell us a little bit more about, you know, what it means to be accusing someone of conspiracy and sort of what Energy Transfer's actually trying to say happened here? Brown: Yeah, so, you know, for there to be conspiracy you essentially have to have multiple parties kind of conspiring together to do crimes ... Feltman: Mm. Brown: And this lawsuit just morphed a number of times since it was originally filed. Again, eventually it was turned into a conspiracy suit, and the players that they were alleging were involved kind of changed over time. So by the time it became a conspiracy suit they were saying two individual Indigenous water protectors—which is what a lot of the pipeline opponents referred to themselves as well as this encampment that called itself Red Warrior Society that was maybe a little bit more kind of into doing direct actions that blocked bulldozers, for example, and Greenpeace were all conspiring together. Feltman: Hmm, and so you had already been investigating the Dakota Access Pipeline for years when this lawsuit came about. In your mind, you know, what are the sort of major points that you had uncovered in your reporting that are, are really conflicting with this narrative from Energy Transfer? Brown: I would say one thing about Standing Rock is that everyone that you talk to who was involved will say, 'I'm gonna tell you the real story of Standing Rock.' So it's like people have very diverse ideas about exactly what happened, and I think that speaks to how many people were there and how many people were kind of approaching this question of pipeline construction from different angles. There were people coming in from all over the world, and some people were really, you know, aligned with what the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe wanted; some people had their own agendas. But people had, I think, overall really good intentions. So there was a lot of diversity, a lot of chaos—you know, the National Guard was called in, and there were kind of federal-level law enforcement resources being used and a lot of pressure from private security, which was working with law enforcement that really amplified the tension in those spaces. There were these lights beaming down on the camp. There were people infiltrating the camps and there were drones flying around. I think, for me, understanding the way, I think, militarism and the war on terror were brought home and into this Indigenous-led resistance space is something that I've really focused on. Feltman: Right. So, you know, based on your reporting this Energy Transfer lawsuit had raised a lot of questions, and was even dismissed initially and had to be sort of repackaged. But then it sounds like they sort of got everything they wanted out of the lawsuit. What do you think are the larger implications of that? Brown: One thing is that a lot of people think of this lawsuit as a SLAPP suit, which stands for 'strategic lawsuit against public participation.' So there are a number of groups that have called this lawsuit a SLAPP. Um, there's this coalition called Protect the Protest Coalition, which includes legal advocacy and movement organizations, like the ACLU [American Civil Liberties Union], Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Union of Concerned Scientists. [ Editor's Note: Greenpeace is also a member of the Protect the Protest Coalition. ] Another group that has called this a SLAPP is the Energy Transfer v. Greenpeace Trial Monitoring Committee, which came together to keep an eye on the trial. That group is wide-ranging, but it's mostly lawyers—so human rights attorneys, there's a First Amendment attorney, law professors, nonprofit leaders, attorneys who have represented Indigenous and environmental defenders. Um, Greenpeace, of course, considers this a SLAPP suit. So, the idea is that, you know, it's not necessarily meant to win on the merits; it's also meant to scare people and send a message and drain a lot of different people of time and resources. This jury did deliver the verdict that the pipeline company wanted, and now the pipeline company can point to that verdict, even if it's overturned, and say, 'Well, a jury in North Dakota said XYZ is true about the Standing Rock movement.' Feltman: Mm. Brown: And, you know, a big part of this case, beyond the conspiracy, were these defamation claims. And, you know, Energy Transfer was saying, 'It's defamatory to say that the pipeline company deliberately destroyed sacred sites,' which was a huge issue in this whole pipeline fight ... Feltman: Mm-hmm. Brown: 'It's defamation to say that private security used violence against nonviolent pipeline opponents.' The third one is that 'it's defamation to say that the pipeline crossed tribal land.' Feltman: Mm. Brown: So those things—two of those things are things that come directly from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and that the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe stands behind. So now Energy Transfer has this record that they can lean on ... Feltman: Mm. Brown: And we don't know exactly how they'll use that. They've really hit Greenpeace hard, and I think [this] opens the door against the environmental movement at large. Feltman: Yeah, well, thank you so much for coming on to chat about the show with us today. I'm definitely looking forward to hearing more of this story over the course of the season. Brown: Thank you so much for having me. Feltman: And just a small update, listeners: Greenpeace has stated its intention to appeal the jury's verdict. That's all for today's episode. You can start listening to the latest season of Drilled wherever you get your podcasts. For more of Alleen's work, check out her newsletter, Eco Files. Science Quickly is produced by me, Rachel Feltman, along with Fonda Mwangi, Kelso Harper, Naeem Amarsy and Jeff DelViscio. This episode was edited by Alex Sugiura. Shayna Posses and Aaron Shattuck fact-check our show. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith. Subscribe to Scientific American for more up-to-date and in-depth science news. For Scientific American, this is Rachel Feltman. See you next time!
Yahoo
05-06-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
North Dakota tribes push for more autonomy amid federal cuts
Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Chairman Jamie Azure delivers an address during the seventh annual Government-to-Government Conference for tribal and state leaders. (Mary Steurer/North Dakota Monitor) North Dakota tribal leaders highlighted uncertainty in federal funding, frustrations with the state Legislature and future economic development projects Wednesday during the state's seventh annual Government-to-Government Conference. The annual event brings leaders of the five tribal nations that share geography with North Dakota together with state officials to share updates, network and discuss common problems facing their communities. 'We're strong, strong people — and we're getting back to that mindset of pridefulness,' Jamie Azure, tribal chair for the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa, said during his address. Azure said development projects in the pipeline for Turtle Mountain involve a retail center, movie theater, bowling alley and more. The conference was started by former Gov. Doug Burgum during his first term in office. Burgum is credited with improving relations between the tribes and the state government, which were at a low point when he took office in 2016. Gov. Kelly Armstrong, who succeeded Burgum in December, called continuing the conference a 'no brainer.' 'We need the collaboration of our tribal partners if we want North Dakota as a state to truly succeed,' Armstrong said. Like Turtle Mountain, officials from the Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate celebrated several new business opportunities coming to the Lake Traverse Reservation. Economic development is not about money, said Sisseton-Wahpeton Oyate Tribal Secretary Curtis Bissonette. 'It's about freedom, dignity and the ability to care for one another across generations,' he said. 'We are not waiting on permission to act.' Tribal leaders on Wednesday each expressed a degree of anxiety about federal programs. Native tribes receive services from the U.S. government in areas as wide-ranging as law enforcement, healthcare and land management. Native officials are worried about the impact of President Donald Trump's sweeping cuts to federal spending. Mandan, Hidatsa and Arikara Nation Chairman Mark Fox said that if the federal government wants to stop funding tribes, it needs to help them maintain a 'financial infrastructure' that allows them to 'to survive and thrive economically.' 'If you take that away, then you're going to cause dependency to exist for the next 100 to 1,000 years,' he said. During her address, Standing Rock Chairwoman Janet Alkire shared some of her tribe's continuing efforts to collaborate with the federal government on land, energy and infrastructure issues. She said after several years of negotiating with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Standing Rock last year entered into a co-stewardship agreement for Dakota Prairie National Grasslands within the boundaries of the reservation, for example. 'These milestones may seem small, but it gives our people the opportunity to participate and have a voice, when once our voice was taken,' Alkire said. She said she is also serving on a tribal advisory committee for the U.S. Department of the Interior under Burgum's leadership. Standing Rock leaders also provided updates on a wind farm project to improve energy infrastructure in southern North Dakota. They hope to finance it in part from a loan from the U.S. Department of Energy, though they said federal staff cuts threaten the program. Alkire said she has asked Burgum if the program can be rehoused under the Department of the Interior. North Dakota tribal leaders see Burgum as an ally in Interior, energy role Tribal leaders also had much to say about the state government. Azure during his address played two video clips from this year's legislative session of state lawmakers questioning the integrity of Turtle Mountain's plans to build a casino and resort in Grand Forks. One was of Sen. Diane Larson, R-Bismarck, who during one floor session said the source of the tribe's financing was murky and might come from cartels. (Larson apologized for her remarks later that floor session.) Azure also played a clip of Rep. Lawrence Klemin, R-Bismarck, who dismissed the project and compared it to a Chinese company's failed plans to build a corn milling plant near the Air Force base in Grand Forks. Klemin said he no longer trusts economic development projects associated with Grand Forks. He later told The Forum of Fargo-Moorhead his comments weren't directed to the tribe. Azure said the comments were insulting to the tribe and called on the statehouse to do better. 'At the end of the day the mindset has to change, because we can't go back here every two years and show videos like this,' he said. Spirit Lake Nation Chairperson Lonna Jackson-Street urged the state to reinstate the motor vehicle excise tax exemption for tribal members living off reservation. Only tribal members who live on reservations receive the tax exemption under a law change adopted by the state Legislature in 2023. Jackson-Street said a large portion of Spirit Lake members live outside the Spirit Lake Reservation due in part to the federal government's illegal taking of tribal land under the Dawes Act of 1887, and now must pay thousands of dollars more in taxes on vehicle purchases. She also said the tribe has continued to take a hit because of North Dakota's burgeoning electronic pull tab industry, which has taken business away from the Spirit Lake Casino. 'We're trying to establish new businesses within our community to supplement what our casino lost because of e-tabs,' she said. During the North Dakota legislative session, Native lawmakers supported a bill that would have required the Legislature to consult tribes on policies that would affect their communities. Proponents of the bill, which failed in the Senate, noted that the statehouse passed laws that allowed for the proliferation of gambling without speaking with North Dakota tribes that rely on casino revenue. 'For the future, as a tribal leader and whoever may step into these shoes, it's important you know that our government works with tribes on consultation,' Jackson-Street told the audience on Wednesday. Armstrong in his speech Wednesday applauded the state Legislature for passing House Bill 1199, which requires the state to create a task force dedicated to reducing the number of missing or murdered Indigenous people in the state. Armstrong said while he was in Congress he worked on Savanna's Act, which seeks to improve the federal response to the same issue. Armstrong said he thinks the Savanna's Act is 'good legislation' but that he thinks House Bill 1199 will be more impactful. 'That's a perfect example of how you don't solve those problems in Washington, D.C.,' he said. 'This is solved on Main Street across rural North Dakota. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Standing Rock appeals dismissal of latest Dakota Access Pipeline lawsuit
Opponents of the Dakota Access Pipeline gather Nov. 1, 2023, in Bismarck ahead of a public meeting on an environmental impact statement. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe opposes the pipeline, citing concerns for its water supply and sovereign rights. (Kyle Martin/For the North Dakota Monitor) The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is asking the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to review a federal judge's decision to dismiss its latest lawsuit against the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers over the Dakota Access Pipeline. Standing Rock filed the lawsuit in October, asking the court to find the pipeline must be shut down because it still lacks an easement authorizing it to pass under the Missouri River's Lake Oahe reservoir, which is regulated by the Army Corps. 'The Corps of Engineers has not earned the trust of our Tribe,' Standing Rock Chairwoman Janet Alkire said in a statement last week announcing the appeal. 'We cannot rely on the Corps to properly evaluate DAPL, so we are continuing our legal efforts to protect our water and our people from this dangerous pipeline.' Greenpeace seeks reversal of verdict, arguing jury wanted to 'punish' someone for pipeline protests The Army Corps originally granted the easement to the pipeline's developer in 2017, but Boasberg revoked it in 2020 after finding the agency had issued the permit without completing the full environmental review required by federal law. The matter was brought to him through a lawsuit the tribe filed against the Army Corps in 2016. Boasberg at the time directed the Corps to withhold making a decision on the easement until it completes a full environmental impact study. He also ordered the pipeline to be shut down, though that demand was later reversed by an appellate court. Five years later, the Army Corps still has not finished the environmental review. It published a draft in late 2023. Standing Rock in its latest suit argues that keeping the pipeline open without an easement is a violation of federal law. The tribe also alleges the Army Corps is at fault for a number of other regulatory violations related to the pipeline. In court filings, Standing Rock has said it intends to present new evidence related to the pipeline's safety. The pipeline company has indicated previously it does not consider that information credible. U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg tossed the suit in March, finding that the courts cannot intervene in the matter until the Army Corps wraps up its environmental study. 'No matter its frustration with Defendants' sluggish pace, it is not yet entitled to a second bite at the apple,' he wrote in his March order. Boasberg previously indicated that while the agency works on the study, it has the option of enforcing its property rights since the pipeline is operating on federal land without authorization. 'The Corps has conspicuously declined to adopt a conclusive position regarding the pipeline's continued operation, despite repeated prodding from this Court and the Court of Appeals to do so,' he wrote in a 2021 order. Standing Rock leaders say they hope the D.C. Circuit will overturn Boasberg's decision to dismiss the case. In her statement, Alkire said the tribe fears the Army Corps' study will 'whitewash' the pipeline's risk to the surrounding environment. The pipeline crosses Lake Oahe just north of the Standing Rock Reservation. The tribe opposes the Dakota Access Pipeline as a threat to its sovereignty, water supply and cultural heritage sites. Federal judge dismisses Standing Rock's latest lawsuit over Dakota Access Pipeline Alkire also underscored the tribe's dismay over a March jury verdict that found the environmental group Greenpeace at fault for damaging the pipeline developers property and business as part of its protests against Dakota Access Pipeline. The jury ordered Greenpeace to pay the company, Energy Transfer, roughly $667 million. Standing Rock has criticized the verdict as based on a false narrative that Greenpeace, and not Standing Rock and other tribes, led the protests. 'We saw Energy Transfer's efforts to re-write history as we know it and lived it in their lawsuit against Greenpeace,' she said. In April, another federal judge ordered the Army Corps to pay North Dakota $28 million in connection to the anti-pipeline protests, finding the agency's actions had wrongfully forced the state to pay millions policing the protests and cleaning up the aftermath. The Dakota Access Pipeline passes through unceded land previously recognized as belonging to the Sioux Nation in 19th century treaties with the U.S. government. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
