Discussion:
Nebraska landowners being FORCED to sell their land for Keystone pipeline . . .
(too old to reply)
(=_=)
2015-01-09 23:25:28 UTC
Permalink
And Alberta's premier is crowing about this being 'good news for Alberta'.

Money and profit before democratic rights of citizens, eh, Prentice?

_________________________________________
7 Hours Ago - The Associated Press


Nebraska court tosses suit over Keystone pipeline


Nebraska's highest court tossed a lawsuit Friday challenging a proposed route
for the Keystone XL oil pipeline, saying the landowners who sued didn't have
legal standing to do so.

The closely watched Nebraska Supreme Court decision could remove a major
roadblock for the $7 billion cross-continental project that Republicans have
vowed to make a key part of their 2015 agenda in Congress.

White House: Obama won't sign Keystone bill

In a split-decision, the court ruled that the three landowners who sued the
state failed to show they had legal standing to bring their case. Four judges
on the seven-judge court agreed that they did have legal standing, but because
the case raised a constitutional question, a super-majority of five judges was
needed.

"The legislation must stand by default," the court said in the opinion.

Economics no longermake Keystone pipeline viable

The lawsuit challenged a 2012 state law that allowed the governor to empower
Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners to sell their
property for the project. A lower court had sided with the landowners, who said
that power resided with the Nebraska Public Service Commission, which regulates
pipelines and other utilities.

The proposed 1,179-mile pipeline would carry more than 800,000 barrels of crude
oil a day from Canada to refineries along the Texas Gulf Coast, passing through
Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Nebraska and Oklahoma along the way.

The newly empowered Republican-led Congress is moving ahead on approving the
project, with the House scheduled to vote on Friday. The Senate is expected to
finish the bill by the end of the month, setting up a showdown with President
Barack Obama, who has threatened a veto.

Despite veto threat, Senate advances pipeline bill

The pipeline needs presidential approval because it would cross the U.S.-Canada
border.

Environmentalists and other opponents argue that any leaks could contaminate
water supplies, and that the project would increase air pollution around
refineries and harm wildlife. But the GOP, oil industry and other backers say
those fears are exaggerated, and that the pipeline would create jobs and ease
American dependence on oil from the Middle East. They note a U.S. State
Department report raised no major environmental objections.

TransCanada has said that if the Nebraska Supreme Court invalidated its
proposed route, it would reapply through the Nebraska Public Service
Commission, which currently includes four Republicans and one Democrat.
Members are elected by district and generally take about seven months to
approve or deny an application.

Members of the commission are elected by district and generally take about
seven months to approve or deny an application.

Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman opposed TransCanada's original proposed route that
crossed the environmentally sensitive Sandhills region, but he approved the
project in 2012 after the company altered the pipeline's path to avoid the
Sandhills. Heineman noted that the proposal was reviewed by the Department of
Environmental Quality, which is part of his administration.
Alan Baker
2015-01-09 23:48:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by (=_=)
And Alberta's premier is crowing about this being 'good news for Alberta'.
Money and profit before democratic rights of citizens, eh, Prentice?
Riiiiiight.

Because left-wing governments never expropriate lands...
Post by (=_=)
_________________________________________
7 Hours Ago - The Associated Press
Nebraska court tosses suit over Keystone pipeline
Nebraska's highest court tossed a lawsuit Friday challenging a proposed
route for the Keystone XL oil pipeline, saying the landowners who sued
didn't have legal standing to do so.
The closely watched Nebraska Supreme Court decision could remove a
major roadblock for the $7 billion cross-continental project that
Republicans have vowed to make a key part of their 2015 agenda in
Congress.
White House: Obama won't sign Keystone bill
In a split-decision, the court ruled that the three landowners who sued
the state failed to show they had legal standing to bring their case.
Four judges on the seven-judge court agreed that they did have legal
standing, but because the case raised a constitutional question, a
super-majority of five judges was needed.
"The legislation must stand by default," the court said in the opinion.
Economics no longermake Keystone pipeline viable
The lawsuit challenged a 2012 state law that allowed the governor to
empower Calgary-based TransCanada to force eastern Nebraska landowners
to sell their property for the project. A lower court had sided with
the landowners, who said that power resided with the Nebraska Public
Service Commission, which regulates pipelines and other utilities.
The proposed 1,179-mile pipeline would carry more than 800,000 barrels
of crude oil a day from Canada to refineries along the Texas Gulf
Coast, passing through Montana, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas,
Nebraska and Oklahoma along the way.
The newly empowered Republican-led Congress is moving ahead on
approving the project, with the House scheduled to vote on Friday. The
Senate is expected to finish the bill by the end of the month, setting
up a showdown with President Barack Obama, who has threatened a veto.
Despite veto threat, Senate advances pipeline bill
The pipeline needs presidential approval because it would cross the
U.S.-Canada border.
Environmentalists and other opponents argue that any leaks could
contaminate water supplies, and that the project would increase air
pollution around refineries and harm wildlife. But the GOP, oil
industry and other backers say those fears are exaggerated, and that
the pipeline would create jobs and ease American dependence on oil from
the Middle East. They note a U.S. State Department report raised no
major environmental objections.
TransCanada has said that if the Nebraska Supreme Court invalidated its
proposed route, it would reapply through the Nebraska Public Service
Commission, which currently includes four Republicans and one Democrat.
Members are elected by district and generally take about seven months
to approve or deny an application.
Members of the commission are elected by district and generally take
about seven months to approve or deny an application.
Nebraska Gov. Dave Heineman opposed TransCanada's original proposed
route that crossed the environmentally sensitive Sandhills region, but
he approved the project in 2012 after the company altered the
pipeline's path to avoid the Sandhills. Heineman noted that the
proposal was reviewed by the Department of Environmental Quality, which
is part of his administration.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...