American Petroleum Institute v. U.S. Department of the Interior

The federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana dismissed two claims in oil and gas industry trade associations’ lawsuit challenging the Biden administration’s pause on certain oil and gas leasing activity. The court concluded that the D.C. Circuit had exclusive jurisdiction over a claim that the pause would prevent the defendants from adopting a timely five-year leasing program under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. The court therefore dismissed the claim without prejudice. The court dismissed with prejudice a claim that the defendants violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) by failing to prepare an environment assessment or environmental impact statement before implementing the pause. The court found that the trade associations lacked statutory standing under NEPA because their only alleged environmental injuries were the public’s generalized interest in informed decision-making and a possibility that the pause would result in a net increase in greenhouse gas emissions because oil and gas from the U.S. would be substituted with oil and gas from countries with less robust regulation. The court said these injuries were “either economic in nature or flow from their general interest in promoting environmentally responsible economic development, interests that do not fall within NEPA’s zone of interests.” The court rejected the defendants’ argument that claims under the Mineral Leasing Act and Administrative Procedure Act were untimely.

The federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana affirmed a magistrate judge’s denial of conservation groups’ motion to intervene in trade groups’ lawsuit challenging the Biden administration’s moratorium on onshore and offshore oil and gas leasing. The magistrate had concluded that the government defendants adequately represented the groups’ interests in maintaining the moratorium. The district court found that the magistrate’s order was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law, and that the court would reach the same decision even if it applied a de novo review standard.

On April 29, 2022, the court denied environmental groups’ motion to intervene, finding that the government defendants adequately represented the groups’ interests in maintaining the moratorium.

On April 18, 2022, the federal district court for the Western District of Louisiana denied a motion by the American Petroleum Institute and other oil and gas trade associations to consolidate their lawsuit challenging the Biden administration’s “indefinite moratorium” on onshore and offshore oil and gas leasing with an earlier lawsuit filed by Louisiana and other states. The court found that consolidation was inappropriate. Factors cited by court included that the overlap of issues of law and fact in the two cases was “far from complete” and that there was “little risk of inconsistent results” since the same judge was adjudicating both cases. The court also said consolidation could risk “injecting new issues” in the states’ case that could “slow the progress toward resolution of the unique legal issues raised in that matter.” The court also noted that none of the plaintiffs were the same in the two cases, and that the cases were not in the same phase since the court had already issued a preliminary injunction and ruled on a motion to dismiss in the states’ case.

American Petroleum Institute and other national, international, and regional trade groups filed a lawsuit in federal district court in Louisiana seeking to compel federal defendants to proceed with onshore and offshore oil and gas lease sales. The trade groups alleged that the defendants had implemented a moratorium on the lease sales in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, the Mineral Leasing Act, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, and NEPA.