General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow the FUCK can a foreign corporation do eminent domain in the US?
TransCanada Threatens Nebraska Landowners With Eminent Domain if They Refuse to Sign Right-of-Way Contractshttp://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/27465-transcanada-threatens-nebraska-landowners-with-eminent-domain-if-they-refuse-to-sign-right-of-way-contracts
TransCanada is warning Nebraska landowners who refuse to sign right-of-way contracts for the controversial Keystone XL pipeline that the company plans to proceed with eminent domain.
The 2012 state law that let Gov. Dave Heineman give final approval of the proposed Keystone XL route through Nebraska came with a deadline. TransCanada has until Jan. 22, two years after Heineman gave the company the thumbs-up, to begin eminent domain proceedings, which could force easements to allow construction, operation and maintenance of the pipeline.
Basically, the company has to use it or lose it.
But the issue could be moot if the Nebraska Supreme Court sides with a Lancaster County district judge who found the law, the Nebraska Major Oil Pipeline Siting Act, unconstitutional because it allowed the approval process to bypass the Nebraska Public Service Commission.
The high court is reviewing the legal challenge. It could issue a ruling as early as Friday, or the decision could come next year -- after the eminent domain deadline has passed.
While we would prefer not to initiate the process to acquire outstanding land rights while there is uncertainty, we are bound by that deadline in order to meet our responsibility to continue to prepare to build the pipeline, Andrew Craig, TransCanadas Omaha-based land manager, said in the letter.
SamKnause
(13,108 posts)government allows it to happen.
Just wait until President Obama signs the TPP.
I know crazy, huh? Everybody thought we did.
K&R
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Last edited Sun Dec 14, 2014, 08:14 AM - Edit history (2)
Kind of the nature of the right-of-way beast.
OTOH with oil below $60 this may be moot for a while.
EDIT: in fairness to merrily's point downthread: this is Nebraska state law which has little if any history of international right-of-way easement claims, so it's certainly not "old hat" in that sense.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Kelo v. City of New London was a Supreme Court case in which the right of a city government to exercise the power of eminent domain in favor of a private corporation. The SCOTUS doesn't take cases of settled law--and that was a a US governmental entity exercising the power, not a foreign corporation. The SCOTUS did rule in favor of the City of London, albeit with disastrous real life consequences. Property owners were forced out, but the private developer did not proceed. So much for public private partnerships.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)However it's happened in three other pipeline crossings from Canada. Its use in Nebraska is unusual because Canada hasn't really cared before where the oil goes once it's south of the 48th parallel before.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)right-of-way can fall back on eminent domain to execute that right-of-way.
Actually since this is state law in Nebraska I have no idea what the precedent is, because I imagine Nebraska's legal history with international claimants to right-of-way is probably nil except possibly for the Omaha airport.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Just from the pipeline example, of the 58 (if I recall that right) oil pipeline crossings between Canada and the US only 3 required eminent domain proceedings, and I actually think only 2 of those went forward under eminent domain rather than settlement.
Also, I edited my original post here to agree with you, that this is kind of legally novel in Nebraska. It's just that the framework has been tested in other states multiple times before.
merrily
(45,251 posts)eminent domain in the US in any state or not? Please give links to the instances where you claim that has happened. Thank you.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)As the OP pointed out in its own 2nd paragraph, this falls out of a state law that grants a right-of-way to Trans-Canada or whatever the hell they're calling themselves this week.
merrily
(45,251 posts)exercise the power of eminent domain against owners of land in the US, as the title of the OP asks? Your original reply made that seem ho hum.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The Nebraska State Legislature is doing so, or rather threatening to do so.
This set-up, by which a state legislature goes to bat for a foreign company in a transportation project, is not terribly novel, but doesn't often happen in Nebraska.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)Are you asking me to demonstrate the foreign projects that are agreed to by US law and treaty have eminent domain rights?
merrily
(45,251 posts)Does it describe a ho hum event?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)Usually the threat of eminent domain proceedings are enough to just get owners to sell. Though that's probably a mistake on the owners' part because eminent domain rebuttals have a pretty decent record in court.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Is that my third or fourth request?
Recursion
(56,582 posts)The Nebraska State Legislature is.
merrily
(45,251 posts)That is why I asked you for a link.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)I won't make that mistake again.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)I assumed he meant "how can a state legislature grant eminent domain rights for a project with foreign backing".
So, OP, if you're still here: no foreign company can directly exercise eminent domain, and that's not what is happening here.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)So, I'll start over:
"A foreign corporation cannot directly assert eminent domain in the US."
Do we all agree on that?
merrily
(45,251 posts)domain so far. I don't know how far corporatists will go eventually, though. However far it is, I'm sure Scalia will decide the Framers agreed all along.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)it is ALWAYS the gov't ... sometimes acting on behalf of a corporation...
i don't see where the poster you're discussing this with has any understanding of how eminent domain works...
sP
Recursion
(56,582 posts)So, just to start over from square one: we all agree that no non-governmental entity can assert eminent domain within the US.
ProdigalJunkMail
(12,017 posts)looks like i must have missed something...
sP
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)The Keystone XL extension is an attempt to shorten the total pipeline route required.
I swear, for people who care so much about this, DUers seem to know very little about it.
GreatGazoo
(3,937 posts)Pipeline construction will require the consent of indigenous peoples, who oppose the construction.
It will risk tourism and seafood jobs on the coast.
It will risk critical wildlife habitat and environmentally sensitive areas.
It would have to cross the Rockies, a far more daunting and expensive proposition than the plains of the Midwest.
http://intelligentdiscontent.com/2012/07/08/why-not-just-build-the-pipeline-through-canada-they-cant/
Recursion
(56,582 posts)As it is, the oil goes by pipeline and train out to the mouth of the St. Lawrence and to various refineries in the US. That will remain true whether or not the XL extension is approved.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)Did you not spam the top half of this thread displaying the fact you have no idea what you're talking about? I think you did.
starroute
(12,977 posts)I was reading something the other day which said that the US is trying to keep Europe dependent on us rather than becoming a geopolitical rival -- and part of that involves making them dependent on US energy supplies rather than turning to Russia.
The actual result, of course, is that Russia and China are getting more buddy-buddy with one another than they have been in decades. And the Europeans are getting restive and starting to wonder why NATO not only still exists but has turned into an arm of American military dominance. But that hasn't gotten through to US policy makers.
It's the Grand Game, and everything from Keystone to the TPP and TTIP is part of it. In the long run, it can't possibly work, but it will screw over a lot of ordinary people in the process.
pampango
(24,692 posts)Most of us believe it is not, so eminent domain should not be applied to the pipeline even if it were a US company requesting it.
Recursion
(56,582 posts)"he 2012 state law that let Gov. Dave Heineman give final approval of the proposed Keystone XL route"
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)And now we have super-sized NAFTA, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, about to be fast-tracked by Republicans and our "liberal" president...
http://www.projectcensored.org/12-naftas-chapter-11-overrides-public-protection-laws-of-countries/
They did this in Texas too~
August, 2012
A judge in Lamar County, Texas, ruled Wednesday night that TransCanadas Keystone XL pipeline has the right of eminent domain, rejecting a plea by farm manager Julia Trigg Crawford and dealing a blow to landowners and environmentalists who have been trying to block construction of the pipeline.
The ruling by Judge Bill Harris removes yet another potential obstacle for TransCanada, which already has permits from the Army Corps of Engineers for the southern leg of the pipeline, which starts in Cushing, Okla., and runs to Port Arthur, Texas. TransCanada has said it will start building as soon as possible.
In March, President Obama endorsed the construction of the southern leg of the pipeline. He said it would alleviate a supply bottleneck at Cushing, where the benchmark price of oil is set for the U.S. market.
But environmental groups and some landowners have been mounting a campaign to stop or delay construction because of the threat a leak might pose to rivers and wetlands.
Crawford had asserted that the Keystone XL pipeline was not entitled to eminent domain because the pipeline would not be a common carrier, open to a variety of oil companies. She said that as a private project, it needed to negotiate rights of way without compelling landowners to enter agreements.
...Jane Kleeb, an activist with the group Bold Nebraska who has been fighting the pipelines eminent domain status, said in an e-mail Wednesday night that A foreign oil company exporting a form of energy that our government is still studying and the Canadian government just issued a safety violation on gets to seize American land without proving they are a common carrier and without any requirement that Americans get a drop of the oil. There is something wrong with this picture.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/texas-judge-rules-in-favor-of-transcanada-in-eminent-domain-case/2012/08/23/87744776-ecda-11e1-a80b-9f898562d010_story.html
merrily
(45,251 posts)RiverLover
(7,830 posts)djean111
(14,255 posts)spedtr90
(719 posts)Enbridge sued a North Dakota landowner who refused to let Enbridge survey his land. Enbridge won. The landowner later refused to grant the company an easement to use his land, and Enbridge filed a lawsuit to claim it under eminent domain. A jury trial begins in May 2015.
Sandpiper further endangers the Great Lakes Basin and Lake Superior - it would transport 4 million barrels of oil a day - more than 4 times what Keystone would. http://www.honorearth.org/enbridge_sandpiper_pipeline
Lawsuit information is from current issue of In These Times.