- Climate Litigation Database
- /
- Search
- /
- United States
- /
- Montana
- /
- Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Department of the Interior
Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Department of the Interior
Geography
Year
2020
Document Type
Litigation
Part of
About this case
Filing year
2020
Status
Notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice filed.
Geography
Docket number
4:20-cv-00109
Court/admin entity
United States → United States Federal Courts → United States District Court for the District of Montana (D. Mont.)
Case category
Federal Statutory Claims (US) → NEPA (US)Federal Statutory Claims (US) → Other Statutes and Regulations (US)
Principal law
United States → 1851 Fort Laramie TreatyUnited States → 1855 Lame Bull TreatyUnited States → 1868 Fort Laramie TreatyUnited States → Administrative Procedure Act (APA)United States → National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
At issue
Challenge to right-of-way granted for the Keystone XL Pipeline.
Topics
, ,
Documents
Filing Date
Document
Type
Topics
Beta
03/04/2022
Notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice filed.
In a case in Montana federal district court challenging a right-of-way and a temporary use permit for the Keystone XL pipeline project, two tribes voluntarily dismissed the action without prejudice.
Notice Of Voluntary Dismissal
02/28/2022
Joint status report filed, requesting that stay be extended for an additional 60 days.
Status Report
11/01/2021
Joint status report filed, requesting that stay be extended for an additional 60 days.
Status Report
08/31/2021
Stay continued for 60 days.
Decision
08/06/2021
Joint status report filed.
Status Report
06/07/2021
Joint status report filed.
Status Report
06/07/2021
Stay continued for 60 days.
Decision
11/17/2020
Complaint filed.
The Rosebud Sioux Tribe and Fort Belknap Indian Community filed a new lawsuit challenging a right-of-way granted in 2020 by BLM for the Keystone XL Pipeline to cross more than 45 miles of federally administered land in Montana. The plaintiff tribes asserted that BLM failed to analyze and uphold the United States’ treaty obligations and failed to analyze the pipeline’s impact on their territories and particularly their water resources and lands held in trust. They alleged that they had identified a number of other issues during the NEPA process—including failure to conduct an adequate climate change analysis—but that the final supplemental environmental impact statement did not remedy these issues. They asserted five causes of action: a claim under NEPA and the Administrative Procedure Act; breaches of the 1851 Fort Laramie Treaty, the 1855 Lame Bull Treaty, the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty; and a failure to adhere to the Department of the Interior’s tribal consultation policies.
Complaint
Summary
Challenge to right-of-way granted for the Keystone XL Pipeline.
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
Impacted group
Fossil fuel
Economic sector
Finance