The Climate Docket

WHAT WE COVER:

  • Liability Litigation
    • Baltimore Lawsuit
    • California Climate Lawsuits
    • Colorado Lawsuit
    • Mass. v. Exxon
    • New York City Lawsuit
    • Rhode Island Lawsuit
    • Other Suits
  • Access to Courts
    • Liability Waivers
    • State Legislation
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Powered by Genesis

You are here: Home / Featured / Judge Blocks Wyoming Fossil Fuel Leases, Says Government Must Consider Climate Impacts
Judge Blocks Wyoming Fossil Fuel Leases, Says Government Must Consider Climate Impacts

Judge Blocks Wyoming Fossil Fuel Leases, Says Government Must Consider Climate Impacts

March 20, 2019 Filed Under: Featured, Liability Litigation

print

By Dana Drugmand

A federal judge ruled that the Trump administration’s authorization of oil and gas leasing in Wyoming failed to adequately consider climate change, a decision that invalidated drilling leases for more than 300,000 acres of federal land.

The lawsuit, brought by WildEarth Guardians, Physicians for Social Responsibility, and the Western Environmental Law Center, charged that the Department of Interior and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) violated federal law that requires federal agencies to account for the environmental impact of their decisions.

“This case concerns the attention the government must give climate change when taking action that may increase its effects,” U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras wrote in Tuesday’s decision. He said that the BLM failed “to provide the information necessary for the public and agency decision makers to understand the degree to which the leasing decisions at issue would contribute to [climate] impacts,” adding that “BLM did not adequately quantify the climate change impacts of oil and gas leasing.”

The three groups had based their lawsuit on the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires accounting for environmental impacts, and challenged the leasing of more than 460,000 acres of public lands in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming. The judge said this decision addresses only the Wyoming leases.

BLM said in its environmental assessment of the leases that they would not have a “measurable effect” on national or global emissions. Contreras disagreed. “The leasing stage,” he wrote, “is the point of no return with respect to emissions.”

He ruled that BLM must provide documents backing its claim that the leases would not affect emissions. After that documentation is provided, the groups may again challenge the assessment and it will be re-evaluated. Until then, the leases being challenged are invalid.

Contreras urged BLM to take the responsibility to assess the leases’ impact on the environment seriously. “Compliance with NEPA cannot be reduced to a bureaucratic formality, and the Court expects 60 [BLM] not to treat remand as an exercise in filling out the proper paperwork,” he wrote.

While Contreras did not permanently vacate the leases, the plaintiffs still considered his ruling a victory.  

“While the ruling applies to Wyoming, it has implications for public lands across the American West and is a major rebuke to the Trump administration’s anti-environment, anti-climate agenda,” WildEarth Guardians said in a press release. Under the Trump administration, millions of acres of federal land have been leased to the oil and gas industry, including nearly 4 million acres last year alone. According to a Department of Interior study released last fall, fossil fuel emissions from public lands accounted for 25 percent of U.S. climate pollution.  

“Every acre of our public land sold to the oil and gas industry is another blow to the climate, making this ruling a powerful reality check on the Trump administration and a potent tool for reining in climate pollution,” said Kyle Tisdel, attorney and Energy and Communities Program director for the Western Environmental Law Center.

“To limit greenhouse gas emissions, we have to start keeping our fossil fuels in the ground and putting an end to selling public lands for fracking,” added Jeremy Nichols, WildEarth Guardians’ Climate and Energy Program director. “This decision is a critical step toward making that happen.”

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • More
  • Click to share on Pocket (Opens in new window)
  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: Featured, Liability Litigation

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Trackbacks

  1. 12 Climate Wins From the National Environmental Policy Act - Center for American Progress says:
    May 29, 2019 at 9:03 am

    […] how the government’s actions contribute to climate change. Since this decision, however, federal courts have repeatedly held that NEPA does require the federal government to consider the effects of a […]

  2. New lawsuit challenges fossil fuel leasing in Colorado over climate impacts says:
    October 9, 2019 at 10:52 pm

    […] have already ruled against the agency in similar lawsuits. In March, a U.S. District Court judge blocked BLM’s approval of oil and gas leasing on more than 300,000 acres in Wyoming because the agency […]

Don't Miss a story
Subscribe 
We promise not to spam you. Unsubscribe at any time.
Invalid email address
Thanks for subscribing! Please check your email for further instructions.

Latest News

Justice Dept. to Argue on Side of Oil Companies in Supreme Court Hearing

By Karen Savage The acting solicitor general will be allowed time to argue in support of ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP and nearly two dozen other companies next week during oral arguments before … [Read More...]

Recent Posts

  • Colorado Judge Rejects Oil Companies’ Attempt to Move Climate Case
  • Biden’s DOJ Could Help Swing Momentum Around Climate Cases
  • Supreme Court Questions Oil Companies’ Tactics to Shake Climate Cases
  • Will Amy Coney Barrett, Whose Father Was a Shell Attorney for Decades, Recuse from Climate Suit?

Most Popular

  • Judge Agrees to Divest from Exxon Before New York's Climate Fraud Case
  • BP Accused of 'Greenwashing' and Deceiving Public With Renewable Energy Ads
  • Battling for Big Oil: Manufacturing Trade Group Leads Assault on Climate Suits
  • What Oil Companies Knew About Climate Change and When: A Timeline
  • Youth Climate Case in Washington State Dismissed by King County Judge

Categories

  • Access to Courts
  • Baltimore Lawsuit
  • California Climate Lawsuits
  • Charleston, S.C. Lawsuit
  • Colorado Lawsuit
  • Connecticut Lawsuit
  • Delaware Lawsuit
  • Exxon Climate Investigation
  • Featured
  • Hoboken Lawsuit
  • International
  • Latest News
  • Liability Litigation
  • Liability Waivers
  • Mass. v. Exxon
  • Minnesota Lawsuit
  • New York City Lawsuit
  • Other Suits
  • Politics
  • Rhode Island Lawsuit
  • State Legislation
  • Uncategorized
  • Washington DC Lawsuit

Follow us

  • View climatedocket’s profile on Facebook
  • View climatedocket’s profile on Twitter

RSS

RSS Feed RSS - Posts

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.