Skip to content
The Climate Litigation Database

Atchafalaya Basinkeeper v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

About this case

Filing year
2018
Status
Preliminary injunction vacated.
Docket number
18-30257
Court/admin entity
United StatesUnited States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (5th Cir.)United StatesUnited States Federal Courts
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US)Clean Water Act (US)Federal Statutory Claims (US)NEPA (US)
Principal law
United StatesClean Water Act (CWA)United StatesExecutive Order 11988United StatesNational Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)United StatesRivers and Harbors Act
At issue
Challenge to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits and authorizations for crude oil pipeline in Louisiana.
Topics
, ,

Documents

Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics 
Beta
Search results
07/06/2018
Preliminary injunction vacated.
In a split decision, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a preliminary injunction issued by a district court in Louisiana that temporarily halted construction of an oil pipeline through the Atchafalaya Basin. In March, the Fifth Circuit stayed the preliminary injunction. In the majority opinion vacating the injunction, the Fifth Circuit said the district court “misperceived” the applicable regulations and found that the Army Corps of Engineers’ analysis “vindicates its decision that an Environmental Assessment sufficed” to satisfy the Corps’ obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Water Act. The plaintiffs’ complaint included allegations that the Corps failed to analyze climate impacts and that floodplain and coastal loss impacts had not been considered as part of the required “public interest” analysis (though these allegations were not at issue in the preliminary injunction rulings).
Decision
03/15/2018
Request for stay of preliminary injunction granted; pending appeal expedited.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed a preliminary injunction barring construction work on the Bayou Bridge Pipeline, a crude oil pipeline in Louisiana. The Fifth Circuit said a stay was warranted because the pipeline developer was likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that a Louisiana federal district court abused its discretion in granting the preliminary injunction. The Fifth Circuit said the district court should have allowed the case to proceed on the merits and sought additional briefing from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the “limited deficiencies” the d03/istrict court identified in the Corps’ analysis, which were related to the effectiveness of wetlands mitigation measures and cumulative impacts. One judge dissented, writing that he would have denied the developer’s emergency motion for a stay.
Decision

Summary

Challenge to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers permits and authorizations for crude oil pipeline in Louisiana.

 Topics mentioned most in this case  
Beta

See how often topics get mentioned in this case and view specific passages of text highlighted in each document. Accuracy is not 100%. Learn more

Group
Topics
Risk
Impacted group
Just transition
Fossil fuel
Economic sector
Adaptation/resilience
Finance