- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Montana
- /
- Indigenous Environmental Network v. Biden
Litigation
Indigenous Environmental Network v. Biden
About this case
Documents
Filing Date
Type
Action Taken
Document
Summary
03/11/2022
Decision
Complaint dismissed as moot.
The federal district court for the District of Montana dismissed as moot a case brought by environmental groups to challenge President Trump’s issuance in 2019 of a Presidential Permit for the Keystone XL oil pipeline. President Biden revoked the Presidential Permit in January 2021. In May 2021, the court determined that the case was not moot because the court could still grant relief such as the removal of constructed portions of the project. Since that time, the project’s developer had removed the border-crossing segment of the pipeline at issue in this case and would relinquish a remaining right-of-way grant once reclamation measures were deemed successful. In addition, there was no longer a possibility that a federal court in Texas would reinstate the Presidential Permit because the Texas court had <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/texas-v-biden/">ruled</a> that that the challenge to its revocation was moot and there was no appeal.
02/24/2022
Decision
Parties ordered to submit a joint status report regarding the status of any appeals or expected appeals in <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/texas-v-biden/">Texas v. Biden</a>, No. 3:21-cv-00065.
–
01/14/2022
Notice
Notice filed by defendants regarding mootness decision in <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/texas-v-biden/">Texas v. Biden</a>.
–
01/12/2022
Notice
TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP filed amended notice of dismissal of <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/texas-v-biden/">Texas v. Biden</a>.
–
10/19/2021
Status Report
Status report filed by TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP.
–
09/27/2021
Notice
TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP filed notice of filing amicus brief in <a href="https://climatecasechart.com/case/texas-v-biden/">Texas v. Biden</a>
–
09/17/2021
Status Report
Status report filed by TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP.
–
07/30/2021
Decision
Motion to dismiss denied.
On July 30, 2021, the district court (which previously determined that the revocation of the permit did not render the case moot) denied the developers’ motion to dismiss. The court found that nothing in the developers’ announcement of the termination of the project altered its earlier decision on mootness. The court said the 2019 permit continued to present a live controversy, and that, even if it did not, it met the mootness exception for voluntary cessation of unlawful activity.
07/21/2021
Opposition
Memorandum filed by plaintiffs in opposition to TC Energy's motion to dismiss.
–
06/30/2021
Motion To Dismiss
Memorandum filed by TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP in support of motion to dismiss based on mootness.
–
06/24/2021
Notice
Notice filed by TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP regarding termination of Keystone XL pipeline.
On June 24, 2021, the developers filed a notice reporting that the federal defendants agreed the case was moot but that the plaintiffs contended that the case still was not moot.
06/09/2021
Notice
Notice filed by TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP regarding termination of Keystone XL pipeline.
In the case challenging President Trump’s issuance of a presidential permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline project, the Keystone XL developers on June 9, 2021 notified the federal district court for the District of Montana of the project’s termination. The developers contended that the project’s termination was a material change of circumstances that warranted reconsideration of the court’s May 28 ruling that the case was not moot despite President Biden’s revocation of the permit. The developers said they would confer with the parties to determine whether they agreed the case was now moot and that if any party disagreed, the developers would file a motion to dismiss.
05/28/2021
Decision
Court ruled that case was not moot.
In the lawsuit challenging President Trump’s 2019 issuance of a presidential permit for the U.S.-Canada border segment of the Keystone XL pipeline, the federal district court for the District of Montana concluded that President Biden’s revocation of the permit did not render the plaintiffs’ claims moot. First, the court concluded that the case presented a live controversy because the court could order removal of the pipeline segment. In addition, the court found that the exception to mootness for voluntary cessation of unlawful activity would apply because the court could prevent President Biden or a future president from unilaterally issuing another permit. The court said it would issue an order on pending summary judgment motions “in due course.”
05/05/2021
Response
Response filed by TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP to court's order of April 7, 2021.
–
04/07/2021
Decision
Order issued directing the parties to submit briefs on whether the case was moot.
–
04/02/2021
Status Report
Status report filed by defendants-intervenors in response to February 17, 2021 order.
–
03/30/2021
Status Report
Status report filed by defendants in response to the court's February 17, 2021 order.
–
02/17/2021
Decision
Case stayed.
In <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01765/protecting-public-health-and-the-environment-and-restoring-science-to-tackle-the-climate-crisis">Executive Order 13990</a>, President Biden revoked the 2019 Presidential Permit for the Keystone XL pipeline. The federal district court for the District of Montana subsequently stayed two cases (this one and Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Department of State) challenging the 2019 permit until April 5 and directed the parties to submit a status report before that date regarding whether the court should proceed with mootness briefing or continue the stay.
02/12/2021
Status Report
Status report filed by defendant-intervenors TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation.
–
02/02/2021
Decision
Order issued directing parties to file status reports in light of President Biden's executive order.
–
11/16/2020
Decision
Memorandum filed by plaintiffs in response to court's October 16, 2020 order.
–
11/16/2020
Response
Response filed by TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP to court's order of October 16, 2020.
–
10/16/2020
Decision
Preliminary injunction denied and leave to file amended complaint filed.
In a lawsuit challenging the 2019 Presidential Permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, the federal district court for the District of Montana denied requests to enjoin work on the pipeline. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to show “at this juncture” that they were likely to succeed on the merits of their claims and that they also failed to show they were likely to suffer irreparable injury. The court—which concluded that the Presidential Permit authorized only a 1.2-mile border-crossing segment of the pipeline and not, as the plaintiffs argued, the additional 875 miles of pipeline in the U.S.—found that alleged irreparable injuries outside the scope of what the permit authorized were “beyond the scope of the relief available.” Although the court found that each side had “valid arguments for their side in the balance of equities and public interest,” including the plaintiffs’ allegations of climate change harms caused by Keystone’s eventual operation, the court found that the “weight of these factors remains unclear and fails to compel the granting of preliminary relief.”
The court also denied motions to amend the complaint to add President Trump’s executive order concerning permitting of facilities at international boundaries and to add a claim challenging a right-of-way permit from the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM). The court rejected the former set of amendments on the grounds of futility, undue delay, and the plaintiffs’ previous opportunity to amend, and the latter on the grounds of undue delay, unfair prejudice to the defendants and defendant-intervenors, and judicial economy. The court asked for supplemental briefing on the remaining constitutional issues, focused on separation of powers issues related to border-crossing pipeline permits.
09/11/2020
Reply
Reply filed by plaintiffs to federal defendants in support of motion for leave to file third amended and supplemental complaint.
–
09/11/2020
Reply
Reply filed by plaintiffs to TransCanada in support of motion for leave to file third amended and supplemental complaint.
–
09/04/2020
Opposition
Opposition filed by defendants to plaintiffs' motion for leave to file third amended and supplemental complaint.
–
09/04/2020
Opposition
Opposition filed by defendant-intervenors TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation to plaintiffs' motion for leave to file third amended and supplemental complaint.
–
03/02/2020
Motion
Notice of motion and motion to file second amended complaint filed by plaintiffs.
–
03/02/2020
Decision
Memorandum of points and authorities filed by plaintiffs in support of motion for leave to file second amended complaint.
–
02/25/2020
Opposition
Opposition filed by plaintiffs to TC Energy Corporation and TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP's motion for summary judgment.
–
02/25/2020
Motion For Summary Judgment
Notice of motion and motion for summary judgment filed by plaintiffs.
–
02/18/2020
Reply
Plaintiffs filed reply to TC Energy's opposition to plaintiffs' renewed motion for preliminary injunction and application for temporary restraining order.
–
02/18/2020
Reply
Plaintiffs filed reply to defendants' opposition to plaintiffs' renewed motion for preliminary injunction and application for temporary restraining order.
–
02/10/2020
Opposition
Opposition filed by defendants to plaintiffs' renewed motion for preliminary injunction and application for temporary restraining order.
–
02/10/2020
Opposition
Memorandum filed by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation in opposition to plaintiffs' renewed motion for preliminary injunction and application for temporary restraining order.
–
02/05/2020
Motion
Errata filed to plaintiffs' notice of renewed motion for preliminary injunction and application for temporary restraining order.
–
02/03/2020
Decision
Order issued setting schedule for briefing on motions.
Briefing on the renewed motion for a preliminary injunction is scheduled to be completed on February 18, and the developer indicated it would not begin pre-construction activities before February 24. Briefing on summary judgment motions is to be completed by March 23, with a hearing scheduled for March 25 on any pending motions.
01/31/2020
Motion
Notice filed by plaintiffs of renewed motion for preliminary injunction and application for temporary restraining order.
After the developer filed a status report on January 14, 2020 indicating that it planned to commence construction of the cross-border segment in April 2020 and would need to engage in pre-construction activities beginning in February 2020, the plaintiffs filed a renewed motion for a preliminary injunction.
01/31/2020
Status Report
Supplemental status report filed by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation.
–
01/24/2020
Response
Response filed by defendants to the court's questions in its December 20, 2019 order.
–
01/24/2020
Decision
Memorandum filed by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation in response to the court's order of December 20, 2019 and in support of renewal of their motion to dismiss.
–
01/24/2020
Motion For Summary Judgment
Memorandum filed in support of TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP
and TC Energy Corporation's motion for summary judgment.
–
01/14/2020
Status Report
Amended status report filed by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation.
–
01/13/2020
Decision
Motion hearing scheduled for March 25, 2020 vacated and reset for April 16, 2020.
–
12/20/2019
Decision
Order issued requesting additional briefing.
In a separate order, the court directed the parties to file supplemental briefs on eight issues related to the scope of authorized activities under the permit, separation of powers, and the developer’s authority to construct the pipeline without a permit if the president lacks authority to issue the cross-border permit.
12/20/2019
Decision
Motions to dismiss denied and motion for a preliminary injunction denied without prejudice.
The federal district court for the District of Montana denied motions to dismiss and for a preliminary injunction in litigation challenging a presidential permit issued in 2019 for a cross-border segment of the Keystone XL pipeline. The court found that the plaintiffs pled plausible claims under the Commerce Clause and Property Clause that President Trump exceeded his legal authority when he issued the permit, as well as claims that the 2019 permit violated a 2004 executive order that established a permitting process for cross-border pipelines. The court found that the plaintiffs had not demonstrated that a preliminary injunction was required to maintain the status quo but said the plaintiffs could renew their request at a later time if the pipeline developer’s activities interfered with the status quo.
10/30/2019
Opposition
Erratum filed to plaintiffs' memorandum of points and authorities in opposition to federal defendants' and TransCanada's motions to dismiss.
–
10/03/2019
Status Report
Supplemental status report filed by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation.
–
09/12/2019
Reply
Reply memorandum filed in support of supplemental motion by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation to dismiss plaintiffs' amended complaint.
–
08/22/2019
Opposition
Memorandum of points and authorities filed by plaintiffs in opposition to motions to dismiss.
–
08/22/2019
Opposition
Memorandum of points and authorities filed by plaintiffs in opposition to motions to dismiss.
–
08/07/2019
Reply
Plaintiffs filed reply to TC Energy's opposition to their motion for preliminary injunction.
–
08/07/2019
Reply
Plaintiffs filed reply to federal defendants' opposition to their motion for preliminary injunction.
–
08/01/2019
Motion To Dismiss
Memorandum filed by defendants in support of motion to dismiss plaintiffs' amended complaint.
–
08/01/2019
Motion
Memorandum filed in support of supplemental motion by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 12(b)(1) or 12(b)(6).
–
07/29/2019
Statement
Statement filed by Indigenous Environmental Network and North Coast Rivers Alliance in opposition to consolidation.
–
07/24/2019
Opposition
Opposition filed by defendants to plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction.
–
07/24/2019
Opposition
Memorandum filed in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction.
–
07/16/2019
Motion To Dismiss
Memorandum filed in support of motion by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation to dismiss plaintiffs' complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 12(b)(1) or 12(b)(6).
–
07/10/2019
Motion
Memorandum of points and authorities filed in support of plaintiffs' motion for preliminary injunction.
–
07/09/2019
Decision
Motion by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation to intervene granted.
–
06/27/2019
Motion To Intervene
Memorandum filed in support of motion by TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, LP and TC Energy Corporation to intervene in support of defendants.
–
04/05/2019
Complaint
Complaint filed.
A regional network of indigenous peoples and a regional association of conservation leaders filed a lawsuit on April 5, 2019 challenging actions taken by President Trump on March 29, 2019 to facilitate construction and operation of the Keystone XL Pipeline. The lawsuit challenged the President’s authority to issue a new presidential permit for pipeline facilities at the U.S.-Canada border (President Trump also revoked the presidential permit issued in March 2017) and his authority to authorize the pipeline’s other U.S. facilities, which extend for 875 miles. The plaintiffs asserted that the President lacked authority to issue the presidential permit because the Constitution’s Property Clause granted Congress the authority to regulate federal lands and Congress had directed BLM to manage the property in question (a 1.2-mile segment in Montana on lands administered by BLM). The plaintiffs asserted that the President lacked authority with respect to the balance of the pipeline for three reasons: (1) the pipeline would cross 45 miles of other lands administered by BLM; (2) the authorization conflicted with Congress’s correlative power to regulate foreign and domestic commerce; and (3) the authorization conflicted with executive orders that delegated authority to approve transboundary pipelines such as Keystone XL to the Department of State. The plaintiffs contended that the executive orders required compliance with all applicable laws and that by evading compliance with those laws, the President’s action conflicted with Congress’s correlative power to regulate foreign and interstate commerce. (In <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-04-15/pdf/2019-07645.pdf">Executive Order 13867</a> issued on April 10, President Trump revoked these executive orders.)
Summary
Challenge to President Trump's revocation of the presidential permit for the Keystone XL pipeline, issuance of a new presidential permit, and authorization of the balance of the 875-mile project in the U.S.