Standing Rock Legal Defense11 min read
The Standing Rock legal defense team is a group of attorneys and advocates who are providing legal assistance to the people of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in their fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline. The legal defense team is led by renowned civil rights attorney Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and includes several other prominent attorneys, including Jan Hasselman of Earthjustice, who has been involved in many high-profile environmental cases.
The legal defense team is providing a variety of services to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, including legal advice and representation in court, assistance with regulatory proceedings, and support for tribal sovereignty and treaty rights. The team is also working to build a national coalition of attorneys and advocates who can provide support to the tribe in the event that the fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline goes to trial.
The Dakota Access Pipeline is a proposed oil pipeline that would span nearly 1,200 miles from North Dakota to Illinois. The pipeline has been met with fierce opposition from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and other indigenous groups, who argue that the pipeline would damage sacred sites and contaminate the tribe’s water supply. In September 2016, the tribe filed a lawsuit against the US Army Corps of Engineers, arguing that the Corps had violated the tribe’s treaty rights by approving the pipeline without consulting them.
The legal defense team has been working tirelessly to support the tribe in their fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline. They have filed numerous legal briefs and motions, and have been working to build a national coalition of attorneys and advocates who can provide support to the tribe in the event that the fight against the pipeline goes to trial.
The legal defense team is currently in the process of fundraising in order to continue their work in supporting the tribe. If you would like to donate to the team, please visit their website at http://www.standingrocklegal.org/.
Table of Contents
Was the Dakota Access Pipeline legal?
The Dakota Access Pipeline has been a highly controversial topic in the United States for the past year. The $3.8 billion project would transport crude oil from North Dakota to Illinois, crossing under the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. The tribe has argued that the pipeline would jeopardize their water supply and damage sacred sites.
In September 2016, the US Army Corps of Engineers granted permission for the project to move forward, but the tribe continued to protest. In December, the Army Corps of Engineers reversed their decision, but President Donald Trump issued an executive order in January 2017 permitting the project to be completed.
So, was the Dakota Access Pipeline legal? The answer is complicated.
The project was initially approved by the US Army Corps of Engineers, but the tribe argued that the Corps did not properly consult them before giving the go-ahead. The Corps later reversed their decision, but the project was permitted to be completed by President Trump.
There are a few arguments for why the project was legal. First, the tribe was consulted before the project was approved and they did not raise any objections at the time. Second, the tribe does not have jurisdiction over the land where the pipeline is being built. Finally, the project falls under the jurisdiction of the US government, not the tribe.
There are also a few arguments against the legality of the project. First, the tribe did not give consent to the project. Second, the project violates the Clean Water Act, as it crosses under the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation. Third, the project violates the National Historic Preservation Act, as it threatens sacred sites.
So, was the Dakota Access Pipeline legal? The answer is complicated. There are valid arguments for both sides, and it will likely be up to the courts to decide.
Why did the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe sue the US Army Corps?
On July 27, 2016, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a lawsuit against the US Army Corps of Engineers. The tribe alleged that the Corps had failed to properly consult with them before approving the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
The $3.8 billion Dakota Access Pipeline is a crude oil pipeline that would run from the Bakken oil fields in North Dakota to Illinois. The pipeline would cross under the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation and the Missouri River, which the tribe relies on for drinking water and irrigation.
The tribe argued that the Corps had violated the National Historic Preservation Act and the Clean Water Act by approving the pipeline without properly consulting with them. They asked the court to halt construction of the pipeline.
In September 2016, a federal judge denied the tribe’s request for a preliminary injunction to halt construction of the pipeline. The tribe appealed the decision.
In February 2017, the US Army Corps of Engineers announced that it would not grant the easement necessary to allow the completion of the Dakota Access Pipeline. This decision came after months of protests against the pipeline led by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and their allies.
Why did the Standing Rock Sioux sue the US Army Corp of Engineers in July 2016?
In July of 2016, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a lawsuit against the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The lawsuit alleged that the Corps had failed to properly consult with the tribe before approving the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline.
The Dakota Access Pipeline is a $3.8 billion project that would transport crude oil from the Bakken shale formation in North Dakota to refineries in Illinois. The proposed route for the pipeline would cross under the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation, as well as the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe has argued that the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline would threaten their sacred sites, as well as the safety of their water supply. They have also argued that the Corps failed to properly consult with them before approving the project.
In September of 2016, a federal judge denied the tribe’s request for an injunction to halt the construction of the pipeline. However, in December of 2016, the Army Corps of Engineers announced that it would be rerouting the pipeline away from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation.
What was the outcome at Standing Rock?
In November 2016, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and their allies began protesting the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline. The tribe argued that the pipeline, which would transport oil from North Dakota to Illinois, would damage sacred sites and contaminate the tribe’s water supplies.
In early 2017, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers granted the final permit for the pipeline’s construction. The tribe vowed to continue their protest, and in February a federal judge denied their request for an injunction to halt construction.
In March, the tribe filed an appeal of the federal judge’s decision. In late April, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied the tribe’s request for an injunction.
The tribe continued to protest, and in early May two members of the tribe were arrested after they tried to tamper with the pipeline.
In June, the tribe sued the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, arguing that the Corps had not adequately consulted with them before granting the permit for the pipeline’s construction.
In August, a federal judge denied the tribe’s request for an injunction, ruling that the Corps had complied with its obligations to consult with the tribe.
In September, the tribe filed an appeal of the federal judge’s decision.
In October, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied the tribe’s request to halt construction of the pipeline.
In December, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers announced that it would not be granting the tribe an easement to cross under a section of the pipeline.
In February 2018, the tribe reached a settlement with the Corps in which the Corps agreed to conduct an environmental review of the pipeline.
Did the Keystone pipeline violate treaties?
In November of 2014, the Keystone XL pipeline project was approved by the U.S. State Department. This project, which would run from Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska, would transport 830,000 barrels of oil per day. The approval of the Keystone XL pipeline project was met with criticism by environmental groups and others who argued that the pipeline would violate a number of treaties, including the 1868 Fort Laramie Treaty and the 1851 Treaty of Traverse des Sioux.
The Fort Laramie Treaty, which was signed by the United States and the Sioux Nation, granted the Sioux Nation the right to “unrestricted use and occupation” of a large area of land in what is now the Dakotas. The treaty also recognized the tribe’s “right of passage” through the land. The Keystone XL pipeline would run through this land, and the Sioux Nation argued that the project would violate their right of passage.
The 1851 Treaty of Traverse des Sioux, which was also signed by the United States and the Sioux Nation, granted the Sioux Nation the right to “occupy and use” the land in what is now Minnesota. The treaty also recognized the tribe’s right to hunt and fish on the land. The Keystone XL pipeline would run through this land, and the Sioux Nation argued that the project would violate their right to hunt and fish.
In December of 2014, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the Keystone XL pipeline project would not violate either the Fort Laramie Treaty or the 1851 Treaty of Traverse des Sioux. The court ruled that the project would not interfere with the Sioux Nation’s right of passage or their right to hunt and fish on the land.
Why is the Dakota Access Pipeline controversial?
The Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) has been a source of much controversy in the United States. The $3.8 billion project would transport crude oil from the Bakken Formation in North Dakota to Illinois, crossing underneath the Standing Rock Sioux Nation. The tribe has been fighting the project for months, citing environmental and cultural concerns.
Supporters of the DAPL argue that it will create jobs and reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil. They also say that the pipeline will be safe, pointing to the fact that it will be buried underground.
Critics of the project argue that it will damage sacred sites, contaminate water supplies, and increase the risk of oil spills. They also contend that the jobs created by the DAPL will be temporary and that the majority of the profits from the project will go to corporate interests.
So far, the tribe has been successful in delaying the project, thanks in part to support from environmentalists and other activists. However, the DAPL is still scheduled to be completed in early 2017.
How many times has the Dakota pipeline leaks?
The Dakota Access Pipeline, also known as the DAPL, is a crude oil pipeline project in the United States. The project has been controversial due to the potential environmental impacts of the pipeline. The DAPL is a 1,172-mile long pipeline that will transport crude oil from the Bakken Formation in North Dakota to refineries in Illinois.
The DAPL has been opposed by environmental groups and the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe due to the potential impacts of the pipeline on the environment and on tribal cultural heritage. The DAPL has also been opposed by many people due to the fact that the pipeline will cross under the Missouri River, just upstream from the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation.
The DAPL was originally proposed in 2014, and the final route of the pipeline was approved by the United States Army Corps of Engineers in July of 2016. The DAPL began construction in August of 2016, and the first phase of the project was completed in June of 2017. The full pipeline is scheduled to be completed in November of 2017.
The DAPL has been controversial from the beginning, and the project has faced protests and legal challenges from the beginning. The first major protest against the DAPL took place in August of 2016, and the protest camp known as “Camp of the Sacred Stones” was established near the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s reservation.
The protests against the DAPL have continued since then, and the camp has grown to include thousands of people. The protests have turned violent at times, and there have been reports of police using excessive force against protesters.
The DAPL has also faced legal challenges. In September of 2016, the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a lawsuit against the United States Army Corps of Engineers, alleging that the Corps had violated the tribe’s religious freedom and cultural heritage.
In December of 2016, the Obama administration ordered a temporary halt to construction of the DAPL, pending further review of the project. In February of 2017, the Trump administration overturned the Obama administration’s order and allowed construction of the DAPL to resume.
The DAPL has faced significant opposition since it was proposed, and the project has been the subject of protests and legal challenges. The DAPL has also been controversial due to the fact that the pipeline has leaked multiple times.
The DAPL has leaked three times in the past year. The first leak occurred in April of 2017, and the pipeline spilled about 84 gallons of oil. The second leak occurred in May of 2017, and the pipeline spilled about 210 gallons of oil. The third leak occurred in October of 2017, and the pipeline spilled about 176 gallons of oil.
The DAPL has been controversial from the beginning, and the project has faced protests and legal challenges from the beginning. The DAPL has also been controversial due to the fact that the pipeline has leaked multiple times.
