Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve

(99,061 posts)
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 07:10 PM Feb 2015

Nebraska judge rules in favor of landowners on Keystone XL eminent domain

Source: Omaha World Herald

By Joe Duggan

LINCOLN — A Nebraska district court judge has temporarily halted the ability of a Canadian company to acquire right-of-way for the Keystone XL pipeline.

Holt County District Judge Mark Kozisek granted a temporary injunction Thursday to landowners who challenged the ability of TransCanada to use eminent domain to acquire land for the controversial pipeline.

The judge made the ruling after landowners filed new lawsuits challenging the state’s pipeline routing law, which was narrowly upheld by the Nebraska Supreme Court in a decision last month.

A spokesman for TransCanada said Thursday the company agreed to the injunction in exchange for an accelerated trial schedule. Although the judge’s order affects just the landowners along the northern part of the pipeline route, the company will offer to stall land condemnation for the roughly 90 property owners along the route who have refused to sign easement contracts.

FULL story at link.



Read more: http://www.omaha.com/news/nebraska/nebraska-judge-rules-in-favor-of-landowners-on-keystone-xl/article_a19c551a-b2f5-11e4-9440-fb3972ced98c.html

31 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nebraska judge rules in favor of landowners on Keystone XL eminent domain (Original Post) Omaha Steve Feb 2015 OP
Its as if its an invasion. Historic NY Feb 2015 #1
we need a real hero angrychair Feb 2015 #17
Great, Steve! Cha Feb 2015 #2
Maybe this is a stupid question and it's all been explained elsewhere -- scarletwoman Feb 2015 #3
TPP blkmusclmachine Feb 2015 #4
Yes....TPP. It can ignore all environmental laws also. glinda Feb 2015 #14
Not a stupid question at all, I wondered the same thing. whathehell Feb 2015 #5
Because of Kelo v. City of New London PoliticAverse Feb 2015 #6
Well, I actually read the whole page - and it looks to me that the ruling concerned scarletwoman Feb 2015 #8
Well Kelo allows a local government to use eminent domain to benefit a private party. PoliticAverse Feb 2015 #10
Thank you again. scarletwoman Feb 2015 #11
I would think that since Interstate Commerce is the main business of well the business; greiner3 Feb 2015 #21
The most galling thing about Kelo is that christx30 Feb 2015 #25
Can't Eminent Domain work both ways? I see to remember a case where a neighborhood fought rhett o rick Feb 2015 #27
They are actually an American company LiberalLovinLug Feb 2015 #29
Whether this is a U.S. Corporation or a foreign one..... RationalMan Feb 2015 #7
Yes, and if the government were doing this central scrutinizer Feb 2015 #24
no, it is a US entity azureblue Feb 2015 #13
Authoritarian Capitalist turbinetree Feb 2015 #30
Woot! The timing could not be better 99th_Monkey Feb 2015 #9
I hope this carries through and stops this abomination. freshwest Feb 2015 #12
It looks like they are already working on plan 'B' Brother Buzz Feb 2015 #15
The problem with going west is two-fold rpannier Feb 2015 #18
If it misses the Koch owned refinery in TX, that'll deny them untaxed billions. freshwest Feb 2015 #22
Canada needs to build their pipeline in Canada! Marthe48 Feb 2015 #23
Our Freedom Loving Republicans think it is okay for a foreign country to declare eminent domain Drahthaardogs Feb 2015 #16
Exactly, my thoughts packman Feb 2015 #19
The Kochs have convinced tea-baggers that Keystone XL will benefit them groundloop Feb 2015 #20
Strip mining an area the size of Florida & slurrying tar sands with clean water to pump through think Feb 2015 #26
Wonderful. jwirr Feb 2015 #28
Do more dishonest institutions than BIG CORPORATIONS exist in our society? nikto Feb 2015 #31

scarletwoman

(31,893 posts)
3. Maybe this is a stupid question and it's all been explained elsewhere --
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 07:45 PM
Feb 2015

but I simply cannot wrap my mind around the concept that a foreign corporate entity can exercise Eminent Domain in our country. How the hell did such a thing happen? Is it part of NAFTA?

scarletwoman

(31,893 posts)
8. Well, I actually read the whole page - and it looks to me that the ruling concerned
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 08:23 PM
Feb 2015

the ability of a local government entity to exercise eminent domain - not a foreign corporation. So I'm still left wondering how TransCanada, a foreign corporation, could possibly have the power of eminent domain in the U.S.

I do thank you for the Wikipedia link, however. It was very interesting reading, and gave me much food for thought. What I found particularly strange and disturbing is that it was the most conservative members of the Court who dissented from the ruling - and I completely agree with their dissent!

PoliticAverse

(26,366 posts)
10. Well Kelo allows a local government to use eminent domain to benefit a private party.
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 08:37 PM
Feb 2015

Nebraska passed a law giving a company building a pipeline the right to use eminent domain
to acquire a property they need (some feel this goes further than the Kelo decision allows).

The Nebraska law LB 1161 (.pdf) http://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/102/PDF/Slip/LB1161.pdf

 

greiner3

(5,214 posts)
21. I would think that since Interstate Commerce is the main business of well the business;
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 01:43 PM
Feb 2015

Of a multi state pipeline, federal law would trump the Kelo statute.

IMO

christx30

(6,241 posts)
25. The most galling thing about Kelo is that
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 03:29 PM
Feb 2015

Pfiser pulled out of the area, and, years later, nothing has been done at all with the land. It sits empty, with nothing there but dead weeds. The homes there were razed for no good reason at all. The mayor has apologized to the homeowners for the whole mess.
I'd love to see the homeowners sue the city of New London for an improper taking. Force them to rebuild the neighborhood and compensate them for legal fees for the origional case.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
27. Can't Eminent Domain work both ways? I see to remember a case where a neighborhood fought
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 05:01 PM
Feb 2015

off the local construction of a Walmart using Eminent Domain. I think they proved that the Walmart would have a negative impact.

LiberalLovinLug

(14,153 posts)
29. They are actually an American company
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 05:51 PM
Feb 2015

masquerading as a Canadian one. No doubt to take advantage of Canadian laws.

According to a page, since taken down, from their own website a couple of years ago:

http://www.straightgoods.ca/2011/ViewArticle.cfm?Ref=869&Cookies=yes

"Like many American companies with operations in Canada, we are incorporated and registered in both Canada and the United States. We currently have 1,631 talented employees in 33 U.S. states. Our U.S. operations are headquartered in Houston and will be responsible for the U.S. construction of Keystone XL."

Also the Koch Brothers and China have huge investments in the oil sands and the go ahead of this pipeline.

RationalMan

(96 posts)
7. Whether this is a U.S. Corporation or a foreign one.....
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 08:12 PM
Feb 2015

it used to be that eminent domain was only used to give property interests to PUBLIC interests (e.g. establishing a wetlands) or for PUBLIC interests that were served by a private company (e.g. giving a right of way to a power company to stretch power cables across someone's land). But in all cases there was a direct public interest. Since the case in New England the SCOTUS has held that you can appropriate private property for private gain if there is some kind of nexus between the private company and the public. I believe in that case it was appropriating private land to build condos and a business park in a run-down part of a city.

What a scam. While I don't disagree the appropriation might have benefitted the public in a general sense of raising property values, etc. the benefit was primarily for personal gain.

That is the issue here. We all know XL will do nothing to reduce gas prices in the U.S. or make us more energy independent. This is all about making the Koch Bros and their buddies even more wealthy.

This is the time to go to the prairies with our pitchforks and whatever else we have to protect ourselves and stand up for us.

central scrutinizer

(11,617 posts)
24. Yes, and if the government were doing this
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 02:39 PM
Feb 2015

conservatives would literally be up in arms ala Cliven Bundy and defending the landowners against the jack booted thugs. But seem to have no issue with a foreign corporation doing this so it can export oil (this is NOT about energy independence, merely profit at the expense of the rest of us). Conservatives also scream about how the national debt is burdening future generations but seem to see nothing wrong with depleting natural resources. If they cared about future generations, they would want as much oil as possible left in the ground for them.

azureblue

(2,131 posts)
13. no, it is a US entity
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 09:01 PM
Feb 2015

and that entity is called the Koch brothers. Who do think is the largest lease holder of the oil sands in Canada? Who do you think already has a deal to ship the sands to China? The Us will not benefit one bit from this pipeline, except maybe to put 35 or so people to work. The Koch brothers have been buying all the politicians involved with trying to push approval.

turbinetree

(24,632 posts)
30. Authoritarian Capitalist
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 05:52 PM
Feb 2015

They have expanded from Singapore model to China and now we get to see the legislative body antics in the states and the federals use this here in the courts what is normally called FAST TRACK, look no further than the TPP, CAFTA, the South Korean Deal, NAFTA and other trade deals---nice huh.
The TPP goes further, (500) corporations if they don't get there way can sue a sovereign country under the TPP rules----nice huh.
This is just a microcosm of what is going on behind closed doors, country , what country, we (Trans-Canada) are a corporation and oligarpghy we can do whatever we want

Brother Buzz

(36,212 posts)
15. It looks like they are already working on plan 'B'
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 10:07 PM
Feb 2015
Stymied in the Lower 48, Alberta floats idea of moving tar-sands oil through Alaska

Officials in the Canadian province of Alberta say they hope to talk to Alaska leaders about shipping tar-sands crude oil through the state as the Keystone XL pipeline route through the Lower 48 remains bogged down in politics.

An Alaska economist said the idea faces many challenges but is possible.

“The desert is full of mirages, but the desert also has water,” said Gunnar Knapp, director of the University of Alaska Anchorage's Institute of Social and Economic Research.

He was putting a hopeful spin on Alaska’s troubling fiscal outlook, with the state facing years of billion-dollar deficits unless it can dramatically increase oil production.

Canadian oil moving through Alaska could provide additional revenue opportunities for state and local governments, through property taxes on facilities, for example.

The state and Alberta have held no meetings on the idea, which was only recently presented when representatives of Alberta Premier Jim Prentice reached out to Kip Knudson, with the governor’s office in Washington, D.C., to request discussions about the concept, said Grace Jang, Gov. Bill Walker’s press secretary.

<more>




http://www.adn.com/article/20150209/stymied-lower-48-alberta-floats-idea-moving-tar-sands-oil-through-alaska

rpannier

(24,304 posts)
18. The problem with going west is two-fold
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 09:17 AM
Feb 2015

1. The Canadian Rockies make the project exceedingly expensive
2. As far as I know, all First Nation People's have rejected allowing the pipeline to go through their Tribal lands. My understanding is, under Canadian Law, the First Nation People have near full jurisdiction over their land and this kind of project would require the council approval

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
22. If it misses the Koch owned refinery in TX, that'll deny them untaxed billions.
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 02:00 PM
Feb 2015

Still an ecological disaster waiting to happen though... No wait, they rush the disasters through fast.

Thanks for the info!

Marthe48

(16,691 posts)
23. Canada needs to build their pipeline in Canada!
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 02:02 PM
Feb 2015

Not The lower 48, not Alaska. Keep the pollution in their provinces. I just bet Canadian citizens would love the hell out of that.

Drahthaardogs

(6,843 posts)
16. Our Freedom Loving Republicans think it is okay for a foreign country to declare eminent domain
Thu Feb 12, 2015, 11:42 PM
Feb 2015

on American citizens. Could you imagine the howls if a Democrat proposed it. Fuckers. This is bullshit and SHOULD be struck down. How could anyone support that and call themselves a patriotic american.

 

packman

(16,296 posts)
19. Exactly, my thoughts
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 12:02 PM
Feb 2015

Where's the Repuke outrage? Why isn't Hannity, Beck, Rush screaming about this? Outrageous! Has national sovereignty become international business piracy now? I would love to see the reaction if American interests were to pull this shit by building a toll road thru the heart of Europe and declaring eminent domain along its road path.

groundloop

(11,487 posts)
20. The Kochs have convinced tea-baggers that Keystone XL will benefit them
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 01:19 PM
Feb 2015

Despite all the evidence to the contrary our tea-bagger brethren are absolutely convinced of the notion that this damned pipeline will crate a gazilliion jobs as well as give them cheap gasoline.

None of it is true, of course. I read that the total number of PERMANENT jobs created would only be about 50 or so. And that tarsands oil is just a drop in the bucket on the global market so it will have no impact on gasoline prices.
 

think

(11,641 posts)
26. Strip mining an area the size of Florida & slurrying tar sands with clean water to pump through
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 03:49 PM
Feb 2015

a pipeline that would cross one of the world's largest aquifers isn't a great idea except if it makes you money....




http://www.nrdc.org/energy/tarsandssafetyrisks.asp

 

nikto

(3,284 posts)
31. Do more dishonest institutions than BIG CORPORATIONS exist in our society?
Fri Feb 13, 2015, 07:38 PM
Feb 2015

Typical mega-corporation, swimming in a sea of crony-capitalism...


Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Nebraska judge rules in f...