Colorado Supreme Court to Decide if Citizens Can Ban Fracking
Supreme Court to hear cases from the communities of Longmont and Fort Collins, where courts have overturned local anti-fracking ordinances
Do the citizens of a town have the right to ban something they perceive to be detrimental to their health and quality of life? Even if the state supports the practice? The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday announced it will weigh in on this debate as it prepares to hear the cases of two communities which, despite the state's pro-fossil fuel stance, voted to ban fracking within their borders.
The court will hear cases from Longmont, where voters banned the oil and gas drilling practice in 2012, and Fort Collins, where voters approved a 5-year moratorium in 2013. After their passage, both grassroots efforts came under fierce attack by both the drilling industry as well as the pro-fossil fuel state government, led by the outspoken fracking advocate Gov. John Hickenlooper (D). The bans were both thrown out in 2014 by two back-to-back district court rulings. The cities and several environmental groups appealed.
"I would say this is pretty huge," said Tanya Heikkila, an associate professor at the University of Colorado Denver who studies fracking policy debates, in regards to the upcoming hearing. While the state generally allows local governments to participate in decisions about how drilling and fracking occur, it refuses to cede municipalities the power to prohibit such activities, even if there is a clear citizen opposition.
"The Supreme Court decision will clarify that issue," Heikkila said.
Similar fights are being waged in both Texas and Ohio, where citizen efforts to ban fracking have been undermined by the state.
In Colorado, the ties between the drilling industry and politics are as murky as fracking wastewater.
Last week, Hickenlooper unveiled the state's supposed "Climate Action Plan," which local environmentalist and activist Gary Wockner dubbed "a slick, glossy, amalgam of smooth rhetoric, pretty pictures and soft-ball recommendations" that will effectively increase, rather than decrease, Colorado's carbon emissions.
Further, a recent investigation published in the Boulder Weekly revealed the influence that a handful of wealthy conservatives, through a network of faux grassroots organizations, have had on the state's environmental policies.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Do the citizens of a town have the right to ban something they perceive to be detrimental to their health and quality of life? Even if the state supports the practice? The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday announced it will weigh in on this debate as it prepares to hear the cases of two communities which, despite the state's pro-fossil fuel stance, voted to ban fracking within their borders.
The court will hear cases from Longmont, where voters banned the oil and gas drilling practice in 2012, and Fort Collins, where voters approved a 5-year moratorium in 2013. After their passage, both grassroots efforts came under fierce attack by both the drilling industry as well as the pro-fossil fuel state government, led by the outspoken fracking advocate Gov. John Hickenlooper (D). The bans were both thrown out in 2014 by two back-to-back district court rulings. The cities and several environmental groups appealed.
"I would say this is pretty huge," said Tanya Heikkila, an associate professor at the University of Colorado Denver who studies fracking policy debates, in regards to the upcoming hearing. While the state generally allows local governments to participate in decisions about how drilling and fracking occur, it refuses to cede municipalities the power to prohibit such activities, even if there is a clear citizen opposition.
"The Supreme Court decision will clarify that issue," Heikkila said.
Similar fights are being waged in both Texas and Ohio, where citizen efforts to ban fracking have been undermined by the state.
In Colorado, the ties between the drilling industry and politics are as murky as fracking wastewater.
Last week, Hickenlooper unveiled the state's supposed "Climate Action Plan," which local environmentalist and activist Gary Wockner dubbed "a slick, glossy, amalgam of smooth rhetoric, pretty pictures and soft-ball recommendations" that will effectively increase, rather than decrease, Colorado's carbon emissions.
Further, a recent investigation published in the Boulder Weekly revealed the influence that a handful of wealthy conservatives, through a network of faux grassroots organizations, have had on the state's environmental policies.
Do the citizens of a town have the right to ban something they perceive to be detrimental to their health and quality of life? Even if the state supports the practice? The Colorado Supreme Court on Monday announced it will weigh in on this debate as it prepares to hear the cases of two communities which, despite the state's pro-fossil fuel stance, voted to ban fracking within their borders.
The court will hear cases from Longmont, where voters banned the oil and gas drilling practice in 2012, and Fort Collins, where voters approved a 5-year moratorium in 2013. After their passage, both grassroots efforts came under fierce attack by both the drilling industry as well as the pro-fossil fuel state government, led by the outspoken fracking advocate Gov. John Hickenlooper (D). The bans were both thrown out in 2014 by two back-to-back district court rulings. The cities and several environmental groups appealed.
"I would say this is pretty huge," said Tanya Heikkila, an associate professor at the University of Colorado Denver who studies fracking policy debates, in regards to the upcoming hearing. While the state generally allows local governments to participate in decisions about how drilling and fracking occur, it refuses to cede municipalities the power to prohibit such activities, even if there is a clear citizen opposition.
"The Supreme Court decision will clarify that issue," Heikkila said.
Similar fights are being waged in both Texas and Ohio, where citizen efforts to ban fracking have been undermined by the state.
In Colorado, the ties between the drilling industry and politics are as murky as fracking wastewater.
Last week, Hickenlooper unveiled the state's supposed "Climate Action Plan," which local environmentalist and activist Gary Wockner dubbed "a slick, glossy, amalgam of smooth rhetoric, pretty pictures and soft-ball recommendations" that will effectively increase, rather than decrease, Colorado's carbon emissions.
Further, a recent investigation published in the Boulder Weekly revealed the influence that a handful of wealthy conservatives, through a network of faux grassroots organizations, have had on the state's environmental policies.