Here’s How Trump Could Undo the Dakota Access Pipeline Victory

“Legally, this is an action that can be overturned easily.”

Ronen Tivony/NurPhoto via ZUMA Press

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Despite the celebrations taking place at the site of protests against the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL), experts say the recent decision to stop the pipeline could be reversed by the Trump administration or the next Congress. “Legally, this is an action that can be overturned easily,” says Sharon Buccino, an attorney and director of the Land and Wildlife program at the National Resources Defense Council.

On Sunday, in a stunning surprise, the Army Corps of Engineers denied Energy Transfer Partners (ETP), the Dallas-based company building DAPL, the easement permit it needs to complete construction under the Missouri River. The Army Corps recommended studying alternate routes that would bypass the Standing Rock Sioux reservation and its water supply.

But according to Deborah Sivas, a professor of environmental law at Stanford University, there are multiple ways the pipeline might still be completed legally in its current location. The Republican-led Congress could vote to clear the way for ETP to drill under the Missouri River by passing an appropriations rider. Then the company would no longer need an easement from the Army Corps to comply with the Clean Water Act, and could thus complete the pipeline. “Trump could sign off on it in week one,” Sivas says. “All it takes is one sentence.”

“Trump could sign off on it in week one. All it takes is one sentence.”

Alternatively, according to Buccino, Congress could exclude public input from the environmental impact statement ordered by the Army Corps, excluding Standing Rock Sioux tribal members from participating and thereby sidestepping complaints that the project desecrates sacred burial sites. Such actions would likely be subject to public criticism, she acknowledges. Buccino also points out that Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Army Corps official who made the announcement, was appointed by President Barack Obama and will leave her position in January. Trump and his administration officials could exert pressure and guidance on the Army Corps’ commanders to reverse their decision.

Trump has expressed his support for the DAPL project. Today a spokesperson for the president-elect issued a statement in support of completing the pipeline despite the Army Corps’ decision. “With regard to the Dakota Access Pipeline, that’s something that we support construction of,” said Jason Miller, “and we’ll review the full situation when we’re in the White House and make the appropriate determination at that time.”

According to financial disclosure forms filed in May, Trump owned stock in Energy Transfer Partners worth between $15,000 and $50,000; the previous year he owned stocks worth between $500,000 and $1 million. Trump also owns between $100,000 and $250,000 in stock in Phillips 66, which holds a one-quarter share of the pipeline project, according to the Associated Press.

ETP, meanwhile, has promised to fight the Army Corps’ decision. In a statement released Sunday night, the company said it was “fully committed to ensuring that this vital project is brought to completion and fully expect to complete construction of the pipeline without any additional rerouting.” It added, “Nothing this administration has done today changes that in any way.”

“I’m encouraged we will restore law and order next month when we get a president who will not thumb his note at the rule of law.”

North Dakota Rep. Kevin Cramer said he shared ETP’s frustration. “Roads, bridges, transmission lines, pipelines, wind farms and water lines will be very difficult, if not impossible, to build when criminal behavior is rewarded this way,” Cramer said, referring to the anti-pipeline protesters. “I’m encouraged we will restore law and order next month when we get a president who will not thumb his note at the rule of law.”

Jan Hasselman, an attorney for the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, remains confident the Army Corps’ decision signals a “historic victory” and sends a clear message that the “era of trampling over indigenous people’s rights is over.” While he is concerned about a Republican Congress pushing back, he believes that if Trump tried to overrule the Army Corps’ decision with an executive order, such an action would be unpopular and might not stand up in court. “It’s a higher bar than you think,” he says, noting that President George W. Bush’s attempts to roll back Clinton-era environmental policy measures were repeatedly challenged in federal court.

The Army Corps is “dancing a fine line,” Sivas says. She believes its recent announcement is a largely a gesture. “They are basically doing something symbolic for the tribe and kicking the can down the road,” she says. The statement is “meant to make it as hard as possible for new administration to reverse, based on precedent.”

At the Ocheti Sakowin camp, the main protest site near the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, the number of anti-pipeline protesters has swelled to as many as 15,000, including around 2,000 Armed Forces veterans who have vowed to defend the protesters by forming a “human shield.” As a blizzard set in Sunday night, campers celebrated by setting off fireworks. “This is a huge victory,” said Dallas Goldtooth, an organizer for the Indigenous Environmental Network. Later in the evening he tweeted, “We need to own this shit. This decision by the Army Corps? Yeah….WE made it happen.”

“I haven’t seen my family in two months,” one man at the camp mused tentatively. “I guess I can go home now if I want?”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate