The Standing Rock Sioux Claim ‘Victory and Vindication’ in Court

A federal judge ruled in favor of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe on Wednesday, handing the tribe its first legal victory in its year-long battle against the Dakota Access pipeline.

James Boasberg, who sits on D.C. district court, said that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers failed to perform an adequate study of the pipeline’s environmental consequences when it first approved its construction. In a 91-page decision, the judge cited the Corps’ study of “the impacts of an oil spill on fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice” as particularly deficient, and he ordered it to prepare a new report on its risks.

The court did not, however, order the pipeline to be shut off until a new environmental study is completed—a common remedy when a federal permit is found lacking. Instead, Boasberg asked attorneys to appear before him again and make a new set of arguments about whether the pipeline should operate.

Click to expand...

Hawkeye10 said:

The reputation of the courts will continue to sink in response to the power grab of judges, another in the very long list of mistakes the elite have made. .

Trust in U.S. Judicial Branch Sinks to New Low of 53% | Gallup

Click to expand...

Hawkeye10 said:

The reputation of the courts will continue to sink in response to the power grab of judges, another in the very long list of mistakes the elite have made. .

Trust in U.S. Judicial Branch Sinks to New Low of 53% | Gallup

Click to expand...

Winston said:

Discrediting the judicial branch is a low brow thing to do. I thought conservatives believed in law & order. What happened to without our laws do we even have a country? That card certainly gets played in the immigration debate. How come conservatives would apply judicial standards to throw people out of the country but, cry foul when the law is applied to protect Native Americans from having their land polluted?

Click to expand...

Winston said:

Discrediting the judicial branch is a low brow thing to do. I thought conservatives believed in law & order. What happened to without our laws do we even have a country? That card certainly gets played in the immigration debate. How come conservatives would apply judicial standards to throw people out of the country but, cry foul when the law is applied to protect Native Americans from having their land polluted?

Click to expand...

Winston said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science...ess-standing-rock-sioux-victory-court/530427/



What are the chances the later hearing stops the pipeline? I'd say very low. However the Army Corps was ordered to conduct a legit environmental study. What happens if the results from that study are less than flattering to ETP and DAPL? Should the attorney's sue ETP based on the emergence of new evidence contained in the environmental review? Regardless the Sioux did experience some retribution. Turns out ETP was pushing a pipeline on a population that didn't want it built and they were doing it without transparency because, **** them, its not our drinking water and fishing ponds and rivers.

Click to expand...

Winston said:

https://www.theatlantic.com/science...ess-standing-rock-sioux-victory-court/530427/



What are the chances the later hearing stops the pipeline? I'd say very low. However the Army Corps was ordered to conduct a legit environmental study. What happens if the results from that study are less than flattering to ETP and DAPL? Should the attorney's sue ETP based on the emergence of new evidence contained in the environmental review? Regardless the Sioux did experience some retribution. Turns out ETP was pushing a pipeline on a population that didn't want it built and they were doing it without transparency because, **** them, its not our drinking water and fishing ponds and rivers.

Click to expand...