SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
enbridge
Big Oil Is Abusing the Law to Silence Water Protectors; It Won’t Succeed
What to do? Stand our ground. Make the solutions. And keep working together.
Apr 21, 2025
This story was originally published by Barn Raiser, your independent source for rural and small town news.
The preamble for the next war over water is here. Aggressive corporations are coming after the few remaining pristine places on Mother Earth—mainly on the land of Indigenous people. Nowadays, it’s not just Native people being targeted, it’s our allies.
Last month, two separate court decisions highlighted the repression being leveled on our Water Protector allies.
On March 19, a jury in Mandan, North Dakota, in Morton County, leveled a blistering $660 million verdict against Greenpeace for its part in the Standing Rock resistance against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL). Anyone who was at Standing Rock knows that Greenpeace was barely there, but they have a name, and Energy Transfer, the pipeline’s owner, made an example out of them. I was in the courtroom when the verdict came in. It was sickening.
When Energy Transfer sues people for so-called defamation, they send a clear message: If you stand up, you will be punished in a lawsuit.
On March 10, Marian Moore, a Water Protector who had participated at a gathering to pray for healing, had her charges reversed by a Minnesota Court of Appeals. Her story: Marian, 67, a long-human rights advocate and environmentalist, was the daughter of Paul Moore Jr., the Episcopal bishop of New York from 1972 to 1989 who had walked with Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights movement. In this century, Marian had been active in opposing Enbridge’s Line 3 pipeline, which crosses northern Minnesota, on its way from Calgary, Alberta, to Superior, Wisconsin, on lands that are subject to Native treaty rights and through waters full of wild rice, an essential food to the Anishinaabe.
On January 9, 2021, Moore was among the more than 100 Water Protectors who gathered on state Highway 169 for a prayer ceremony near a Line 3 construction site in Aitkin County. For that, she caught three charges, including trespass on critical infrastructure (a gross misdemeanor), unlawful assembly and, rather redundantly, presence at an unlawful assembly (both misdemeanors). I was a witness in her defense.
In November, 2023, an Aitkin County jury found her guilty of gross misdemeanors and sentenced her to six months in county jail, but with a stay of execution for nine months, allowing her to appeal. “I had to not trespass on any Enbridge property and be law-abiding, or I would be in Aitkin County jail for six months,” she explains to me.
Six months seems like a long time for someone who stood on a state highway to pray, looked at a construction site, and left once a dispersal order was given. “I think they targeted me because I was friends with Indigenous people and [was] bringing money to the movement against the pipeline,” says Marian.
Meanwhile out in Morton County, Greenpeace is getting socked with that ridiculous verdict. $660 million is a lot of money for some folks who were barely at Standing Rock. Aitkin County, Minnesota, and Morton County, North Dakota, are trying to teach a lesson; or, more appropriately, through these cases, corporations are trying to stifle resistance and discourage allies.
How Does This happen?
Welcome to the New Order, the one where corporations are now considered legal “persons,” protected by law enforcement and the judicial system as they press the law’s boundaries and extract precious resources.
The entire trial against Greenpeace was shameful.
Here’s how it went: The law firm Gibson Dunn carefully picked Mandan in Morton County, an oil-friendly jurisdiction where Judge James Gion denied most important motions made by Greenpeace. Four motions to change the venue from Mandan were denied. Gion would not let Greenpeace tell the jury of Energy Transfer’s terrible safety record. According to a report by Greenpeace and Waterkeeper Alliance, the Pipeline Hazardous and Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) issued 106 safety violations to Energy Transfer and Sunoco between 2002 and 2018, including failures to conduct corrosion inspections, to maintain pipeline integrity, and to repair unsafe pipelines in a timely manner within five years.
What’s so sad is that the North Dakota jury couldn’t even stand up for the water, the land, and the people.
Greenpeace was not allowed to tell the jury that Energy Transfer’s identical federal lawsuit against Greenpeace was dismissed by a federal judge. The judge effectively limited defense evidence.
Gion would not allow live streaming, so if you wanted to “see justice” you had to go to Mandan. It’s said that justice is blind, and, in North Dakota, justice is literally blind and asleep. I saw jurors asleep while on duty in the court room.
“Greenpeace did not manipulate Standing Rock, but Energy Transfer has manipulated Morton County,” Janet Alkire, chairwoman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, said in a statement shortly after the verdict.
As I drove toward Bismark from my own reservation, White Earth, a verse from the Rolling Stones’ “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” stuck in my head: I went down to the County Courthouse to get my share of abuse. At least that’s how I sing it. I’ve had my share. That’s what it’s like being on trial in the Deep North, especially if you’re a Water Protector.
The chances for a Native person to get justice in North Dakota or northern Minnesota are probably pretty small. Native people represent a third of the people in jail in Becker, Hubbard, and Aitkin counties. Yet, we represent only 5.2% of the population.
Standing Rock Tribal Chairwoman Alkire was appalled at the state of justice in Mandan:
I take offense to the jury verdict… We expect more from North Dakota judges and members of the jury from our neighboring communities… Neither Greenpeace nor anyone else paid or persuaded Standing Rock to oppose DAPL… Energy Transfer’s false and self-serving narrative that Greenpeace manipulated Standing Rock into protesting DAPL is patronizing and disrespectful to our people. We understand that many Morton County residents support the oil industry… But we are your neighbors, and you should not be fooled that easily.
The lawsuit against Greenpeace is called a SLAPP suit, or Strategic Litigation against Public Participation. It is intended to silence opposition. There are anti-SLAPP laws in 35 states, including Minnesota. Fundamentally, this is a question of free speech. When Energy Transfer sues people for so-called defamation, they send a clear message: If you stand up, you will be punished in a lawsuit.
“To me, this is a freedom of speech case and freedom of association case,” attorney Sarah Vogel, a onetime assistant U.S. attorney and former North Dakota agriculture commissioner, told the North Dakota Monitor before the case went to trial. Vogel, who grew up in Mandan, said, “As residents of a small state without a whole lot of power, we’d better be able to speak up. Who knows? I mean, this time, it’s Greenpeace, but who will it be next time?”
The case in Aitkin County was a little different but had some of the same premises. The idea that “outside agitators” came and did not do nice things was a theme. Greenpeace fits that narrative for Energy Transfer, and Marian Moore, who is a striking six feet two inches tall, does not quite look like a local gal.
Trey Cox is Energy Transfer’s lead attorney from Gibson Dunn (the same law firm that brought us the Chevron Donziger verdict). Cox kept referring to Water Protectors as outsiders and paid protesters. One might wonder, where Energy Transfer is from? Certainly not from Mandan. They are from Texas. Where was TigerSwan, the private security company hired by Energy Transfer from? North Carolina. And where was Frost Kennels, the company whose employees unleashed dogs on Water Protectors, from? Ohio. In other words, mercenaries.
In Minnesota, remember that Enbridge is a foreign corporation from Canada, with big swaths of pipeline networks across our north country, including aging pipes and the dirtiest oil in the world that poses a major threat to the Great Lakes, repository of a fifth of the world’s freshwater. Yet, Enbridge received priority policy protection in Minnesota during the Covid-19 pandemic and was allowed to bring in 4,300 people to build Line 3 as a part of “essential industry” in the state.
These companies also want to censure and erase any mentions of their abysmal safety records. Energy Transfer has a multitude of fines for spills, and Enbridge has the two largest oil spills on the U.S. mainland to its name. In the North Dakota trial, Greenpeace could not bring up Energy Transfer’s safety record, while in Aitkin County, the judge did not allow Marian Moore to say “treaty rights” or allude to the Minnesota case where Anishinaabe Water Protectors’ charges were dismissed in September 2023, based on the treaty and cultural beliefs, and “in the interests of justice.”
The Pipeline to Curtail First Amendment Rights
The Trump administration intends to further criminalize Water Protectors, and certainly protests in general. That much is clear. This is on top of the more than 300 anti-protest bills introduced in state legislatures since 2017, according to the International Center for Not-for-Profit Law, 54 of which have been enacted and currently undermine the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and assembly.
Moreover, over the past half-century, a dangerous doctrine of “qualified immunity” has been hatched up, underwritten by the Supreme Court, to limit the ability of individuals to hold police officers accountable for violating their constitutional rights. Qualified immunity basically gives officers expanding impunity to injure, or even kill, civilians like Water Protectors.
In April 2024, North Dakota Federal Judge Daniel Traynor dismissed Sophia Wilansky’s case against North Dakota law enforcement on the grounds that law enforcement had “qualified immunity.”
Greenpeace was inspired by a story called the Rainbow Warrior, where people of all colors would come together to protect Mother Earth.
A blast from an “explosive munition” was leveled at her in the early hours of November 21, 2016. Law enforcement had constructed a barricade across Backwater Bridge on North Dakota Highway 1806 to prevent unarmed Water Protectors, including Wilansky, from using the road. Morton County Deputy Jonathon Moll, had positioned himself on the turret of a Humvee and fired a flashbang grenade from his 12-gauge shotgun, hitting Wilansky, nearly severing her hand and destroying almost all of the arteries, skin, tissue, muscles, nerves, tendons, and bone in her left forearm. “At 21-years-old, I lost the use of my arm because a police officer shot me from a gun turret with an exploding grenade at a protest. My life will never be the same, but I will also not be scared away from fighting for what is right,” Wilansky said in a Civil Liberties Defense Center media release on April 6, 2024. An additional statement read: “The doctrine of Qualified Immunity is repulsive in that it allows police officers to… shoot protestors with anything they want without repercussions.”
Yes, there will be appeals. Marian Moore won on appeal. And a Greenpeace spokesperson told Barn Raiser the nonprofit will appeal the verdict, but the timing and process of the appeal has yet to be determined.
But what’s so sad is that the North Dakota jury couldn’t even stand up for the water, the land, and the people. Instead, that jury gave a Texas oil pipeline company, founded by Trump-supporting billionaire Kelcy Warren, everything it wanted and then some. That was shameful. And, without that appeals court, an Aitkin County jury would have been content to let Marian Moore sit in the slammer.
Marty Garbus is a trial attorney who has represented, among others, Nelson Mandela, Leonard Peltier, Daniel Ellsberg, Lenny Bruce, Elie Wiesel, Cesar Chavez, and Vaclav Havel. Garbus is also a member of the Energy Transfer v. Greenpeace Trial Monitoring Committee, a group that followed the trial day in and day out. Here is what he said when the jury returned its shameful verdict:
In my six decades of legal practice, I have never witnessed a trial as unfair as the one against Greenpeace that just ended in the courts of North Dakota. This is one of the most important cases in American history. The law that can come down in this case can affect any demonstration, religious or political. It’s far bigger than the environmental movement. Yet the court in North Dakota abdicated its sacred duty to conduct a fair and public trial and instead let Energy Transfer run roughshod over the rule of law.
Greenpeace has very strong case on appeal. I believe there is a good chance it ultimately will win both in court and in the court of public opinion.
What to do? Stand our ground. Make the solutions. And keep working together.
In Minnesota, we call ourselves the Home Team, and we are many colors. Marion and thousands of others told their stories and faced a lot of police for the sake of protecting water. I, for one, am grateful to them, and the new work underway by groups like Rise and Repair in Minnesota that does multi-racial organizing work around climate justice.
Weweg bi azhe giiwewag. The snow geese return.
There is greatness in the flocks of birds returning to these lands of water. Each year, they return and remind us of the life that is here, a life which needs water. I am reminded that’s who I work for. Greenpeace was inspired by a story called the Rainbow Warrior, where people of all colors would come together to protect Mother Earth. Critics say the story wasn’t a real prophecy, but I see it happening today. People of all colors coming together to protect Mother Earth is a good story for epic times. Thank you, allies.
Keep ReadingShow Less
If Harris Wants to Win Over Young Voters in Swing States, She’ll Say No to Line 5
America’s most dangerous crude oil pipeline threatens the future of the Great Lakes. That’s why young voters want it shut down.
Nov 01, 2024
Picture this: shimmery sunlight dancing on water. Deep blue crests over seafoam green before dissipating as waves meet the shore. The Chicago skyline gazes from a distance.
Running along Lake Michigan is one of my favorite pastimes at Northwestern University. We pride ourselves on having not one, but two beaches on campus that showcase the lake. The body of water is so wide it feels more like an ocean. The sound of the waves crashing onto the sand reminds me of the beaches back home in the San Francisco Bay Area.
But in the heart of the Great Lakes—where Lake Michigan meets Lake Huron—America’s most dangerous crude oil pipeline threatens 700 miles of coastline and our climate future.
By incorporating pipeline shutdowns in her climate platform, Harris can send a clear message that our future doesn’t rely on fossil fuels and that people can raise their families and thrive in the Great Lakes region.
Growing up in the Bay Area showed me that addressing the climate crisis is my generation’s mission. When I was a junior in high school in 2020, California experienced the worst wildfire in state history. Orange haze blanketed everything. With the air quality index skyrocketing, I did not dare go outside. Friends had to evacuate their homes, and a teacher of mine saw their house burn down. I knew I wanted a career focused on the environment when I realized our wildfires would grow worse every year without action.
Coming here for college, I was excited to explore a new part of the country and catch a break from the wildfire season. People tout the Midwest as a haven from the climate crisis, but environmental issues are aplenty here as well.
As the presidential election date gets closer with states in the Midwest crucial for the Harris-Walz ticket to pick up, looming threats to our Great Lakes should gain wider attention, all because of North America’s most dangerous fossil fuel pipeline. The Great Lakes hold one-fifth of the world’s available fresh water supply, but under it lurks an oil pipeline called Line 5, operated by Canadian oil corporation Enbridge, which could ruin millions of people’s drinking water, mar Lake Michigan’s beauty, and devastate our communities.
Right in the heart of the Great Lakes, the Line 5 oil pipeline is accelerating our climate crisis as we speak. Seventy-one years ago, Enbridge built Line 5 right through Michigan and Wisconsin and in some of the most sensitive areas in the Great Lakes as a shortcut to reach Ontario, Canada. A spill from Line 5 could reach the Lake Michigan shoreline where myself and hundreds of thousands of people live and walk by everyday.
Enbridge has a sordid history when it comes to pipeline infrastructure. They are responsible for one of the largest inland oil spills in United States history from another pipeline they operate in Michigan. They didn’t shut the valve for 17 hours, and remediation efforts took five years. A similar spill from Line 5 would significantly threaten the Great Lakes and the people who call this region home. When burned, the oil in Line 5 contributes more greenhouse gas emissions than the three most polluting coal-fired power plants in the country combined
With a major election this year, young voters across Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Minnesota will be a crucial voting bloc. For many of us—myself included—it’s going to be our first time voting in a presidential election. Taking action for the environment is at the forefront of my generation’s concerns, which means that delivering a tangible victory to protect our climate and Great Lakes is absolutely necessary. Enbridge’s Line 5 must be shut down and decommissioned. While a Harris-Walz administration can deliver by making this action happen, U.S. President Joe Biden can do so now by revoking this outdated pipeline’s permit.
The Great Lakes aren’t just the source of drinking water for over 40 million people. They’re our identity, creating a major reason why many of us live in the Midwest to begin with. When governments are putting more energy toward keeping fossil fuel pipelines in the Great Lakes than preserving the water we drink from, swim in, and fish from, it gives the impression that our natural resources aren’t worth saving. We cannot afford to be complacent in a time of crisis, and we must do better.
Indigenous Tribes, environmental groups, small businesses, and local residents across the Great Lakes have been fighting Enbridge’s Line 5 for over a decade because of the severe risks it poses to our air, land, water, and health. Enbridge has been operating illegally in Michigan since Gov. Gretchen Whitmer took action to stop the pipeline in 2020. And since 2012, Enbridge has been trespassing on the Bad River Band’s reservation in Wisconsin.
People are taking action against Line 5 by signing petitions, attending rallies in the U.S. and Canada, writing to their legislators, and emailing administration officials like U.S. Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg for a shutdown. Volunteers have organized local businesses, faith communities, and Native Nations to attend teach-ins and community events and share information on Line 5’s dangers.
With Vice President Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket now, shutting down Line 5 should be a key issue in her policy platform. Gov. Whitmer won reelection handily after calling for a shutdown order, which shows that moving away from fossil fuels and decommissioning unsafe pipelines can be a winning electoral issue. Prioritizing a Line 5 shutdown could show that Harris can be one of the most pro-environment presidents in American history—her track record from California and her time in the Senate suggests that she prioritizes environmental policies like this. Shutting down the pipeline can set the stage for a new climate champion government.
A Line 5 shutdown is an achievable, easy win with real advantages. If climate is on the agenda for young voters in key Midwest states, Line 5 should be on the list of the vice president’s campaign priorities. By incorporating pipeline shutdowns in her climate platform, Harris can send a clear message that our future doesn’t rely on fossil fuels and that people can raise their families and thrive in the Great Lakes region. Young voters from the Midwest, like me, are firmly uniting behind one key message: Shut down Line 5.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Line 5 Poses Catastrophic Risks—It’s Past Time President Biden Shut It Down
The president has a choice: side with local leaders working to protect their water and communities or side with a foreign company looking to increase their profits.
Jan 10, 2024
Any day now, the Biden administration could weigh in on the future of the most dangerous, outdated, and unnecessary oil pipeline in the country. We don’t need to wait for a lengthy legal process to play out while this ticking time bomb puts us at risk. President Biden can decommission and shut down Line 5, an aging oil pipeline running through the Great Lakes, by revoking its presidential permit before it’s too late.
Line 5 is owned by the Canadian company Enbridge, the biggest of Big Oil transporters. As a shortcut to get its oil to a Canadian refinery in Sarnia, Ontario—which receives 95% of the product—Line 5 cuts through Wisconsin and Michigan. While the Canadian government has protected the oil industry and Enbridge, the Biden Administration has the opportunity to side with the people of Michigan and Wisconsin instead of Big Oil.
Along its 645-mile route, Line 5 has failed 33 times already, spilling at least 1.1 million gallons of oil since 1968. Despite the risks and Enbridge’s historic failures as a pipeline operator, the Biden Administration, under pressure from Canada, has been silent on Line 5’s future. The pipeline continues to illegally operate through the Bad River Band's land in northern Wisconsin and the Straits of Mackinac in Michigan.
Line 5 is dubious engineering and a bad investment for Michigan and Wisconsin, built across the most vulnerable site for an oil spill in the entire Great Lakes watershed.
Canada’s government is lobbying the Biden Administration to keep the aging Line 5 operational, but local leaders have long called for it to be shut down. Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel filed a lawsuit to shut Line 5 down because it runs through the Straits of Mackinac, threatening the world’s greatest freshwater source. Meanwhile, a federal judge in Wisconsin sided with the Bad River Band and ordered the pipeline off tribal lands where Line 5 trespasses through a sensitive tribal watershed. President Biden has a choice: side with local leaders working to protect their water and communities or side with a foreign company looking to increase their profits.
Communities and leaders are calling for Line 5 to be shut down, which can be done without raising prices at the pump. Rather than respect the law, Enbridge has proposed work around schemes that would continue to put communities at risk.
The Bad River Band tribe has demanded that Line 5 get off their land and out of their watershed—yet the pipeline remains upstream and still puts the tribe at risk. Instead of complying with the tribe’s demand, Enbridge proposes building a reroute that skirts the entire reservation. While the reroute would no longer cross through tribal land, it would be located upstream of the reservation, keeping the Tribal Community in harm’s way of future spills.
Enbridge has proposed the Great Lakes Tunnel Project to house the new Line 5 pipeline. It would be a concrete tunnel, 21 feet in diameter, that runs under the Straits of Mackinac. This is dubious engineering and a bad investment for Michigan and Wisconsin, built across the most vulnerable site for an oil spill in the entire Great Lakes watershed.
It’s clear that Enbridge is a bad actor that can’t be trusted, and has a terrible safety record of oil pipeline disasters. In addition to the 1.1 million gallons of toxic oil Line 5 has already spilled, Enbridge’s other disastrous tar sands pipeline, Line 3, ruptured four aquifers in northern Minnesota during construction alone, which Enbridge touts as the safest construction possible. In its Line 5 maintenance—or lack thereof—Enbridge has violated pipeline support standards and numerous other legal doctrines that protect us and our shared natural resources from the dangers of oil spills. In its 70 years of operating Line 5, Enbridge has demonstrated countless times that it simply doesn’t care about its repeated violations and instead would rather prioritize their profits than abiding by the law and protecting our communities.
There is no justification to keep Line 5 operating or extend its life when science—and the Biden administration’s own stated commitment to climate action require us to rapidly transition away from fossil fuels. President Biden must step up and use his presidential authority to force Line 5 to shut down. It’s either us, the people who live in the Great Lakes region, or Big Oil.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Disastrous': Michigan Regulators Approve Enbridge Line 5 Expansion
"Today's decision is another notch in a long history of ignoring the rights of tribal nations," said one Indigenous leader.
Dec 01, 2023
Days after climate advocates applauded Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer's signing of a package of clean energy bills that one campaigner said would "translate into better air, water, and health for everyone," state regulators took several steps back from a sustainable future as they approved a key permit for Enbridge's Line 5 expansion project beneath the Great Lakes.
In a 2-0 vote with one member abstaining, the Michigan Public Service Commission (MPSC) approved siting for the project, granting Canadian oil firm Enbridge permission to build a concrete tunnel beneath the Straits of Mackinac—which connect Lake Michigan and Lake Huron—to house a four-mile section of its 645-mile petroleum pipeline.
The company can't break ground on the project without approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which isn't expected to announce its decision until 2026, but Indigenous tribes and advocacy groups that have fought for years to stop the pipeline from being built expressed outrage that the commission approved the permit despite well-documented objections.
All federally recognized tribes in Michigan have passed resolutions opposing Line 5, which safety experts have warned puts the Great Lakes at risk for a massive explosion and oil spill.
"Today's decision is another notch in a long history of ignoring the rights of tribal nations," said Whitney Gravelle, president of the Bay Mills Indian Community. "We must act now to protect the peoples of the Great Lakes from an oil spill, to lead our communities out of the fossil fuel era, and to preserve the shared lands and waters in Michigan for all of us."
Tribes have said the project would violate their treaty rights and that Enbridge has not proven it can operate the tunnel safely. The company's Line 6B oil spill in 2010 contaminated nearly 40 miles of the Kalamazoo River.
"Disappointment isn't a big enough word," Rebecca Liebing, attorney for Bay Mills, told Michigan Bridge after the MPSC vote was announced. "There's no ambiguity regarding how the tribes feel about this matter... We're not done fighting."
The lakes hold 84% of North America's surface freshwater, and the Line 5 expansion would be the largest underwater hazardous liquids tunnel ever completed, said the coalition Oil and Water Don't Mix (OWDM).
"With this action, the Michigan Public Service Commission is putting Michigan in uncharted, dangerous territory while ignoring warnings by independent industry experts who testified during the MPSC's proceedings," said Sean McBrearty, a campaign coordinator for OWDM. "Never before has an oil tunnel that also carries other hazardous liquids been built in one of the most ecologically sensitive spots on Earth."
McBrearty pointed out that Enbridge already operates other oil pipelines in the Straits of Mackinac, and said there is "an open question whether Enbridge intends to build the tunnel or is simply using the project as a diversion and delay from shutting down the existing twin oil pipelines."
"Moreover, the Line 5 tunnel will worsen the impacts of the climate crisis by adding 27 million metric tons of polluting and climate altering carbon into the atmosphere, equivalent to 10 coal-fired power plants," said McBrearty, calling on President Joe Biden to revoke the presidential permit for Line 5.
Whitmer campaigned on closing down Line 5, but Enbridge has claimed the governor has no authority to shut down its pipelines because it runs between the U.S. and Canada and is subject to federal regulations.
A spokesperson for the governor told Michigan Bridge that Whitmer is reviewing the MPSC's decision and that her goal "has always been getting the pipelines out of the water as quickly as possible."
Christopher Clark, senior attorney for Earthjustice, which represented Bay Mills as it presented its case objecting to Line 5 to the MPSC, said the commission ignored "the concerns of tribal communities in favor of the profit of a fossil fuel company."
"The evidence before the commission demonstrated that the proposed tunnel would put the Great Lakes region at serious risk and profoundly endanger the identity and lifeways of the Bay Mills Indian Community, a sovereign tribal nation whose relationship to these waters preexists the United States," said Clark. "We will use every open avenue to shut down Line 5 in order to avert an environmental catastrophe and slow the unthinkable impacts of climate change.”Keep ReadingShow Less
US Judge Orders Stretch of Enbridge Line 5 Shut Down on Tribal Land
"But for the theft of Indigenous lands," said environmental activist and attorney Steven Donziger, "this pipeline would not even exist."
Jun 19, 2023
The Canadian oil company Enbridge has been ordered to pay the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa $5 million in damages for trespassing and to gradually shut down part of its Line 5 pipeline in Wisconsin after a federal judge found that the company has placed the tribe's sacred land at risk of an environmental disaster.
U.S. District Judge William Conley of the Western District of Wisconsin handed down the ruling on Friday after the Bad River Band argued in court that there are now fewer than 15 feet between parts of Line 5 and the Bad River following the partial erosion of the riverbank in recent months.
The tribe said its land is in imminent danger of a potential pipeline rupture as roughly 12 miles of Line 5 run through the Bad River Band's reservation, carrying up to 23 million gallons of oil and liquefied natural gas each day through Michigan and Wisconsin to Ontario.
Line 5 has been the site of about 30 oil spills in its 70-year history, and another of Enbridge's pipelines ruptured in 2010, spilling more than 840,000 gallons of oil into a creek and the Kalamazoo River in Michigan.
"Tribal sovereignty prevailed over corporate profits."
In addition to ordering Enbridge to pay the tribe, Conley on Friday gave the company three years to wind down its operations on the Bad River Band's land, ordering it to "cease operation of Line 5 on any parcel within the band's tribal territory on which defendants lack a valid right of way and to arrange reasonable remediation at those sites."
The judge denied, however, that the pipeline's presence has put the tribe in imminent danger. He said an oil spill "would unquestionably be a public nuisance" but claimed an immediate shutdown of a portion of the pipeline would disrupt energy security and cause fuel costs to soar for locals.
Bad River Band Chairman Mike Wiggins said the tribe does not see the ruling as "cause for unqualified celebration" but expressed appreciation for the judge "putting an end to Enbridge's flagrant trespass and disregard for our rights."
"Tribal sovereignty prevailed over corporate profits," Wiggins said, adding that the tribe expects Enbridge "to fight this order with all of their corporate might."
"We are under no illusion that Enbridge will do the right thing," he added.
Enbridge said over the weekend that it plans to appeal the ruling.
Erick Arnold, an attorney for the Bad River Band, said the three-year timeline leaves the tribe "vulnerable to catastrophe."
"While the band's motivations have never been about money," said Arnold, "such a small award for a decadelong trespass during which Enbridge earned over a billion dollars in net profits from Line 5 will not sufficiently deter trespassers like Enbridge, but will instead create an incentive for corporations to violate the sovereignty of the band."
Environmental lawyer and activist Steven Donziger called the order a "victory" overall.
"But for the theft of Indigenous lands," he said, "this pipeline would not even exist."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Indigenous-Led Action Outside White House Urges Biden to 'Protect People, Not Polluters'
Protesters are calling on the president and Congress to "prioritize climate justice, racial justice, Indigenous rights, housing justice, and transit justice in the infrastructure discussions."
Jun 30, 2021
For the third straight day, climate action advocates descended on Washington, D.C. Wednesday--this time for an Indigenous-led demonstration demanding that President Joe Biden stand up "for the rights of our communities instead of doing the bidding of corporate polluters."
"If we can stop these pipelines, stop our dependence on oil and gas, and change to cleaner types of energy that are sustainable, it will protect the future."
--Crystal Cavalier-Keck, MVP opponent
The demonstration spearheaded by the Indigenous Environmental Network (IEN) followed a blockade of the White House entrances by the youth-led Sunrise Movement that led to arrests on Monday as well as a Tuesday rally calling for an end to fossil fuel subsidies.
"As Indigenous peoples on the frontline of the climate crisis, we knew it was only a matter of time before Biden's neoliberal agenda was revealed for what it truly is," said IEN Green New Deal organizer Ashley (McCray) Engle, absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma/Oglala Lakota Nation, in a statement.
"The truth is, neoliberalism is a tool to maintain the status quo, to perpetuate white supremacy, and to kick the can of problems down the road," Engle added. "We are here to say that is unacceptable and we will continue to stand for Unci Maka [Grandmother Earth], our communities, and future generations by any means necessary."
Organizers of the Wednesday event, which also shut down multiple White House entrances, urge the president to "act now to stop dirty fossil fuel projects in all our communities, from Line 3 to the Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) and beyond, and call on Congress to prioritize climate justice, racial justice, Indigenous rights, housing justice, and transit justice in the infrastructure discussions."
The series of actions in the nation's capital comes as the White House and federal lawmakers are working out the details of infrastructure legislation. Democratic leaders are pursuing a two-track approach, aiming to pass a reconciliation bill focused on "human infrastructure" provisions not included in a bipartisan deal reached last week.
The night before Biden and centrist lawmakers announced the deal, the Biden administration filed a legal brief backing the federal government's 2020 approval of Line 3 under former President Donald Trump--a move that outraged climate and Indigenous campaigners.
Participants in Wednesday's action outside the White House emphasized that Biden could stop Line 3, a project of the Canadian company Enbridge, which is trying to replace an aging oil pipeline with a bigger one that crosses Anishinaabe treaty lands.
Crystal Cavalier-Keck, a member of the Occoneechee Band of the Saponi Nation and leader in the fight against the Mountain Valley Pipeline in North Carolina, pointed out Wednesday that the MVP "is going through a lot of sacred places."
"They are taking people's land. The federal government is supposed to protect people and sacred spaces, but they're not doing their job," she said. "Biden campaigned on the environment and protecting people. Letting all these pipelines like Line 3, DAPL, and MVP come through: that's not helping the public, that's not helping the people he campaigned for."
Cavalier-Keck declared that "if we can stop these pipelines, stop our dependence on oil and gas, and change to cleaner types of energy that are sustainable, it will protect the future."
Speaking at Wednesday's event, Siqiniq Maupin, co-founder and director of Sovereign Inupiat for a Living Arctic, referenced the issue of missing and murdered Indigenous people--especially women, girls, and Two-Spirits--whose disappearances and deaths haven't been investigated or solved.
Various reports and investigations have connected those cases to the fossil fuel industry's "man camps" for transient workers near Indigenous communities across the continent.
"I see this building and people that are so proud to be a part of this country that was built on the blood of Indigenous and Black and Brown bodies," Maupin said outside the White House. "I know there is a way forward, and it is not what we have been doing--and I will die trying to fight this, and I know there are so many that are willing to."
"This is not the future that my two little girls will grow up in," she continued. "We will not take white supremacy anymore and we will not take the police who support that, who don't give a shit about our lives--when we go missing they don't investigate it, but when we're in front of the D.C. building they're all over it."
Maupin added that "I hope the police look around and see what they are protecting--to see what they are defending and to see if they are really defending justice, or the big oil company and white supremacy."
Taysha Martineau, a water protector of the Fond du Lac Tribe who is opposing the Line 3 pipeline, also highlighted the connection, declaring that "as Indigenous women we face higher statistics of sexual violence than any other demographic. The ongoing epidemic of missing and murdered indigenous women is exacerbated by these corporations."
"As a mother of four children, three of whom are female, it is my family that faces those statistics," Martineau explained. "If the Biden administration allows this corporation to build this unnecessary and harmful project, not only are they violating treaty rights, they are placing the lives of Indigenous children at risk."
"One in three Indigenous women go missing or are murdered, raped, or sexually assaulted before the age of 15," she noted. "I ask the Biden administration to take a look at my children, and answer a question I have to ask myself every single day, 'Which one?'"
A collection of groups joined the action and endorsed organizers' two key demands directed at the president:
- Protect People, Not Polluters: Use your executive authority to stop approving fossil fuel projects and declare a climate emergency. Fossil fuel pipelines, infrastructure, exports, and leases fuel the climate emergency, pollute in Black and Brown communities, and violate treaty rights. Act now to end the era of fossil fuel production, protect our communities, and Build Back Fossil Free.
- Pass a Climate Justice Infrastructure Bill: Use your bully pulpit to make sure Congress includes strong climate, Indigenous rights, housing justice, racial justice, and transit justice commitments in an infrastructure bill. Build on the THRIVE Agenda, to build a climate care economy, good jobs for all, an end to fossil fuel subsidies, and a renewable energy standard!
Partners for Wednesday's event included 350.org, Arm in Arm, Center for Biological Diversity, Climate Justice Alliance, Friends of the Earth, Institute for Policy Studies, Oil Change International, Public Citizen, ShutDownDC, Sunrise Movement, and WECAN.
"To be the climate president we need, President Biden can use his executive authority today to stop approving fossil fuel projects and declare a national climate emergency," said Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute.
"With the stroke of a pen, Biden can take key actions to end the fossil fuel era and jumpstart a 100% renewable and just energy future," Siegel added. "We're starting to suffer a climate meltdown, and Biden has to seize the moment to Build Back Fossil Free."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Climate Activists Put 'All Eyes on BlackRock' With Protests Demanding Shareholder Action
"We're giving notice that we'll be watching to see if BlackRock will actually pour any water on the flames it has started. We're here because we can't fix our planet with promises, only action can do that."
Apr 18, 2021
As corporations around the world prepare for annual shareholder meetings, climate activists held a series of actions leading up to and throughout the weekend in cities around the world that aimed to put "all eyes on BlackRock," the world's largest money manager, with nearly $9 trillion in assets under management.
"At the moment, BlackRock is a major part of the problem," said Robin Wells, an English teacher and activist with Fossil Free London who joined the U.K. city's demonstration, in a statement from the global network BlackRock's Big Problem.
"Today we're giving notice that we'll be watching to see if BlackRock will actually pour any water on the flames it has started," Wells said. "We're here because we can't fix our planet with promises, only action can do that."
In addition to London, activists demonstrated at BlackRock offices in Boston, Dallas, Miami, New York City, San Francisco, and Zurich.
"CEO Larry Fink talks a big game on climate, but the company is the top investor in oil, gas, and coal," noted Patrick Houston of New York Communities for Change. "As the season of shareholder annual meetings looms, all eyes are on BlackRock."
As BlackRock's Big Problem details on a webpage about this year's shareholder season:
In BlackRock's 2021 Stewardship Expectations report, the asset manager finally acknowledged that voting against management and supporting shareholder proposals often leads to positive changes at companies. In January 2021, BlackRock expanded its voting criteria and announced that it will hold directors accountable when their companies fail to address climate change in their business plans. In March, both BlackRock and Vanguard joined the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, a first move on climate for Vanguard.
While acknowledgments and commitments may mark a change in thinking within BlackRock and Vanguard, it is action that is needed to curb the climate crisis. So this shareholder season, as the world looks toward COP26, their default position must be to vote in favor of pro-climate shareholder resolutions and against corporate boards when a company doesn't have a clear climate transition plan.
The network is focused on eight specific votes. In the oil and gas sector, there will votes on resolutions for BP and Shell to set public targets consistent with the goals of the Paris agreement, and against ExxonMobil chairman and CEO Darren Woods as well as lead independent director Kenneth C. Frazier for failing to implement plans consistent with limiting global temperature rise to 1.5oC, the more ambitious Paris goal.
There are similar plans for financial services--votes on resolutions for Barclays and MUFG to set Paris-related targets and against Wells Fargo chairman Charles H. Noski for failing to implement plans consistent with the 1.5oC goal. There will also be a similar vote against Duke chair and CEO Lynn Good as well as independent lead director Michael G. Browning. Activists are also pushing for a resolution requesting Bunge issue a report about eliminating deforestation in its soy supply chain.
"At this point, voting with corporate management to maintain business as usual is an active choice against climate action," the network says. "If asset managers continue to choose not to vote for climate action this shareholder season, they will be actively working against progress, science, and the interests of their own clients and beneficiaries."
While protesters aimed to raise awareness about the upcoming votes, some also directed attention to the controversial Line 3 pipeline, which opponents have dubbed "a climate time bomb." The Canadian company Enbridge is trying to replace a corroding pipeline with a larger one that would carry oil from Alberta, through North Dakota and Minnesota, to Wisconsin. Construction on the project has been repeatedly halted in recent months by water protectors' direct actions in Minnesota.
"My heritage is of a people whose rights were violently violated. My future is of a planet whose climate is being devastatingly altered. BlackRock should wield its vast financial power to mitigate the climate crisis," declared 19-year-old climate justice activist Xiye Bastida of the Otomi-Toltec Nation. "It can start by divesting from Enbridge, the owner of the Line 3 pipeline, before moving to divest from all tar sands."
Last month, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) questioned Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen on why the federal government hasn't deemed BlackRock "too big to fail" and subjected the firm to stricter oversight. The senator said during a hearing that "it isn't just banks that pose a risk to the economy. In 2008, two investment companies, Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers, failed, triggering the 2008 crash."
The Biden administration faces mounting pressure to protect U.S. financial institutions and the economy from risks posed by the climate emergency as well as demands that the administration help end the flow of private finance from Wall Street to major polluters. Polling results released Monday show that a majority of U.S. voters support federal government action to prevent future climate-related economic crises.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Victory for First Nations in Northern Gateway Fight
Jul 01, 2016
In a stunning victory for First Nations and environmentalists, a Canadian court has overturned the approval of the highly controversial Northern Gateway pipeline in Canada.
The country's Federal Court of Appeal ruled yesterday in a 2-to-1 decision that the government had failed to adequately consult with First Nations over the pipeline, which will severely impact their way of life.
The proposed $7.9 billion Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline, if built, would transport the dirty tar sands fuel from Alberta to an export terminal on the west coast of British Columbia. The cultural and ecological impact of the pipeline would be huge.
Oil tankers would have to navigate what are seen as treacherous waters. The pipeline itself crosses the Great Bear rainforest and would have run down the Skeena River, the major salmon river of northwest British Columbia.
The Court's decision effectively "shuts the door" on the pipeline ever being built, argue its critics. It also blocks yet another potential route for the tar sands to get to market. Indeed, the tar sands industry is rapidly running out of options to get its dirty fuel to the consumer.
In its 153-page judgment, the court argued that consultation with First Nations by the previous Stephen Harper Government was "brief, hurried and inadequate" even though it would have been easy for the two sides to have a meaningful dialogue.
The damning judgement said: "Canada failed to make reasonable efforts to inform and consult. It fell well short of the mark."
It continued: "Missing was a real and sustained effort to pursue meaningful two-way dialogue. Missing was someone from Canada's side empowered to do more than take notes, someone able to respond meaningfully at some point."
"The inadequacies -- more than just a handful and more than mere imperfections -- left entire subjects of central interest to the affected First Nations, sometimes subjects affecting their subsistence and well-being, entirely ignored," wrote the court.. "Many impacts of the project were left undisclosed, undiscussed and unconsidered."
Trudeau's cabinet will now have to decide what to do. At least they must undertake an adequate consultation exercise before a new permit can be issued. However, Canada's new Prime Minister said he was opposed to the pipeline back in April, and whether his Government sides with First Nations or the powerful tar sands lobby will be seen as a critical test of his leadership on both sides of the debate.
Meanwhile, First Nations and environmentalists reacted positively to the news:
"At every turn you're going, you are seeing nails in the coffin of the Enbridge project," said Peter Lantin, president of the council of the Haida Nation. "I don't think there's enough room for another nail in the coffin."
"Everybody is pretty happy - it's wonderful result," said Art Sterritt, an elder with the Gitga'at First Nation. "There is really no good that can come of the Northern Gateway project. ... Just one spill from this project basically wipes out our rights to harvest, our access to our food, our economy, and our culture."
Sven Biggs, a representative of one of the environmental groups in the lawsuit, said: " "Today's ruling shows what the people have been saying all along - this pipeline will never be built. This is a victory,"
Jessica Clogg, senior counsel with Vancouver-based West Coast Environmental Law, added, "This ruling provides an important opportunity for Prime Minister (Justin) Trudeau to do the right thing and end the project for good by implementing a ban on oil tankers on the north coast of British Columbia."
However, Enbridge said it remains "fully committed" to building the pipeline.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Victory in Canada as Court Strikes Down Northern Gateway Pipeline
Opponents "said 'no' to Enbridge 12 years ago when it first proposed the project. And now that 'no' has the backing of the courts."
Jun 30, 2016
Environmentalists and Indigenous rights advocates celebrated on Thursday after a judge in a landmark ruling overturned the Canadian government's 2014 approval of a controversial pipeline project.
The court found (pdf) that the government had not done enough to consult with First Nations communities that would be impacted by building the Northern Gateway pipeline, approved under then-Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
The decision "confirms that the environmental assessment of major pipeline projects was badly eroded by the previous government's dismantling of environmental laws," said Barry Robinson, an attorney for the environmental law firm Ecojustice, which brought the case.
Caitlyn Vernon, a spokesperson for the Sierra Club, told CBC, "Today is a good day for the B.C. coast, climate, and salmon rivers. By overturning federal approval of Northern Gateway, the courts have put yet another nail in the coffin of this pipeline and tankers project."
"First Nations, local communities, and environmental interests said 'no' to Enbridge 12 years ago when it first proposed the project. And now that 'no' has the backing of the courts," Robinson said.
The pipeline would have transported tar sands crude from Alberta to Kitimat, British Columbia. Opponents have long warned that it would expand the use of dangerous fossil fuels, delay the implementation of clean energy, and increase dangers faced by the environment and impacted communities, including possible violation of First Nations treaty rights.
Critics have also pointed out that Northern Gateway's parent company, Enbridge, has a history of environmental destruction, including a massive pipeline rupture that spilled close to one million gallons of crude oil into Michigan's Kalamazoo River and Talmadge Creek in 2010--eventually forcing the company to pay $75 million in cleanup costs.
Karen Wristen, executive director of Living Oceans Society, one of the plaintiffs in the legal challenge, said Thursday, "We know from Enbridge's own shoddy public safety record that tar sands oil spills have devastating consequences. Today's decision is a victory across the board: for the wildlife living in this marine environment and for the communities living at its shores."
The social advocacy group Council of Canadians congratulated the First Nations communities and all other groups involved in the court case. The organization's executive director, Maude Barlow, has previously called the opposition movement against Northern Gateway "one of the most important fights we have right now."
The court ruling also denotes an early victory for Alberta Premier Rachel Notley, who campaigned on a promise of ushering in climate-friendly policies, telling voters after a landslide victory in May 2015 that "change has finally come to Alberta. New people, new ideas, and a fresh start for our great province."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sanders Hits Rivals on Climate, Declares Opposition to Enbridge Pipelines
'We need to ensure corporations don’t keep wrecking our climate and environment for their own profit.'
Feb 29, 2016
During a campaign stop in Minneapolis, Minnesota on Monday, Bernie Sanders took decisive aim at the fossil fuel industry and his Republican colleagues who deny the science of climate change, telling the crowd: "I do not know what [they] are smoking."
Sanders launched into his speech with the declaration: "Climate change is real, climate change is caused by human activity, and climate change is already doing devastating harm in our country and all over the world."
"Now," he continued, "I don't know what my Republican colleagues are smoking, but they go around the country and they say, 'Well climate change is a hoax. It is not real.' It is a very dangerous thing for a nation when you reject science. I will not reject science. What the scientific community found is that--as serious and dangerous as the situation is today--it will only get worse in the coming years if we do not get our act together and transform our energy system away from fossil fuels to energy efficiency."
In Minnesota, which is among the states holding a presidential primary on Super Tuesday, oil giant Enbridge is currently seeking to build two new pipelines, the Sandpiper and the Alberta Clipper, which together would transport over 1.4 million barrels of oil per day.
During the rally, which was held at the Minneapolis Convention Center, Sanders declared his opposition to those projects.
"President Obama said when his administration was reviewing Keystone XL that he wouldn't grant approval if the project made climate change significantly worse," Sanders said. "A Sanders administration would direct the State Department to apply that same test to the Alberta Clipper and the Sandpiper because we need to ensure corporations don't keep wrecking our climate and environment for their own profit."
Sanders also touted his record of environmental leadership, which included being one of the first in Congress to oppose Keystone XL, which his Democratic rival Hillary Clinton only recently came out against.
Last week, his campaign also released an email criticizing Clinton for her support of fracking, as well as for attending a fundraiser hosted by a major fracking investor. "[J]ust as I believe you can't take on Wall Street while taking their money, I don't believe you can take on climate change effectively while taking money from those who would profit off the destruction of the planet," the email stated.
After Monday's rally, environmental campaigners commended Sanders for "once again" exemplifying leadership on environmental and climate issues.
"The litmus test of climate leadership in 2016 is keeping fossil fuels in the ground," said Jason Kowalski, spokesperson for 350 Action. "Once again Senator Sanders has come out against new fossil fuel infrastructure that would exacerbate the climate crisis. President Obama rejected the Keystone XL pipeline because of its devastating impacts on our climate and communities, and the Sandpiper and Clipper Pipelines are not much different."
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy