Description: Challenge to executive order reversing President Obama’s withdrawal of lands in the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans from future oil and gas leasing.
-
League of Conservation Voters v. Trump
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 04/13/2021 Order Download District court judgment vacated and case remanded with instructions to dismiss without prejudice. Ninth Circuit Said Biden Action Mooted Case Challenging Trump Revocation of Withdrawal of Oceans Lands from Oil and Gas Leasing. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated the judgment of an Alaska federal district court that held that President Trump exceeded presidential authority granted by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act when he issued an executive order revoking President Obama’s withdrawals of certain areas in the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans from oil and gas leasing. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the parties that President Biden’s revocation of President Trump’s executive order rendered the case moot. The Ninth Circuit directed the district court to dismiss the case without prejudice. 03/29/2021 Brief Download Responsive supplemental brief filed by federal appellants. 03/31/2020 Reply Download Reply brief filed by State of Alaska. 03/31/2020 Reply Download Reply brief filed by American Petroleum Institute. 03/26/2020 Reply Download Reply brief filed by federal appellants. 02/20/2020 Amicus Brief Download Amicus brief filed by natural resources law professors in support of League of Conservation Voters et al. 02/13/2020 Brief Download Answering brief filed by plaintiffs-appellees League of Conservation Voters et al. 11/22/2019 Brief Download Opening brief filed by intervenor State of Alaska. In its opening brief, Alaska argued that the district court erred in determining that President Trump lacked authority, contending that the district court’s interpretation “distorts the meaning of the withdrawal provision of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and effectively allows a single president to nullify the Act and vitiate the Act’s promises for the State of Alaska.” 11/22/2019 Brief Download Opening brief filed by American Petroleum Institute. The American Petroleum Institute's opening brief argued for a reading of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act that gives the president “broad discretion over withdrawals,” including authority to modify previous exercises of that discretionary authority. 11/07/2019 Brief Download Opening brief filed by federal appellants. The federal government, State of Alaska, and American Petroleum Institute filed briefs urging the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the District of Alaska’s decision vacating President Trump’s revocation of President Obama’s withdrawals of areas in the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans from oil and gas leasing. The federal brief argued that the plaintiffs had not satisfied threshold requirements for their suit, including standing, ripeness, a waiver of sovereign immunity, and the existence of a congressionally created cause of action. The federal brief also argued that the district court erred in concluding that President Trump’s action exceeded his authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, which provides that the president “may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the outer Continental Shelf.” -
League of Conservation Voters v. Trump
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 05/28/2019 Notice of Appeal Download Notice of appeal filed by State of Alaska. 05/28/2019 Notice of Appeal Download Notice of appeal filed by intervenor-defendant American Petroleum Institute. 05/28/2019 Notice of Appeal Download Notice of appeal filed by federal defendants. 03/29/2019 Order Download Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment granted, defendants' and defendant-intervenors' motions for summary judgment denied, Section 5 of Executive Order 13795 vacated, and plaintiffs' additional request for injunctive relief denied. Alaska Federal Court Vacated Trump Revocation of Obama Withdrawals of Arctic and Atlantic Areas from Oil and Gas Leasing. On March 29, 2019, the federal district court for the District of Alaska vacated the portion of a 2017 executive order issued by President Trump that revoked President Obama’s prior withdrawals of certain areas of the Outer Continental Shelf in the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans from oil and gas leasing. The court held that President Trump’s revocation of the withdrawals exceeded presidential authority granted by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). The court said that the text of Section 12(a) of the OCSLA—which provides that the president “may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the outer Continental Shelf”—did not expressly grant the power to revoke prior withdrawals. Although the court said the inclusion of “from time to time” in Section 12(a) rendered the provision ambiguous, the court concluded that the structure, legislative history, and purposes of the OCSLA indicated that Congress intended to authorize the president only to withdraw lands from leasing. The court indicated that instances of Congress deciding not to challenge “the small number of prior revocations” fell “far short of the high bar required to constitute acquiescence” to the president’s authority to revoke withdrawals, and that there was “[t]oo little information” about Congress’s inaction with respect to Section 12(a) to override the court’s interpretation. 07/18/2018 Motion for Summary Judgment Defendants filed memorandum of points and authorities in support of their motion for summary judgment and in opposition to plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment. 06/08/2018 Motion for Summary Judgment Download Memorandum filed by plaintiffs in support of motion for summary judgment. 03/19/2018 Order Download Motions to dismiss denied. Alaska Federal Court Allowed Plaintiffs to Proceed with Lawsuit Challenging Reversal of Obama’s Withdrawal of Arctic Coastal Areas from Oil and Gas Leasing. The federal district court for the District of Alaska denied motions to dismiss an action challenging President Trump’s executive order reversing President Obama’s withdrawals of coastal areas in the Arctic’s Beaufort and Chukchi Seas from oil and gas leasing. The court said the doctrine of sovereign immunity did not apply because the plaintiffs asserted that President Trump acted beyond the powers delegated to him by the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) and under the Constitution. The court also concluded that plaintiffs did not need express congressional authorization to bring their claims under the OCSLA and the Constitution’s Property Clause and that restrictions on the declaratory relief that courts could issue against the president did not warrant dismissal of the entire action. In addition, the court found that the plaintiffs had adequately alleged standing and that OCSLA did not require that the action be brought in the D.C. Circuit. 10/02/2017 Reply Download Reply field by intervenor-defendant American Petroleum Institute in support of motion to dismiss. 10/02/2017 Reply Download Reply filed in support of federal defendants' motion to dismiss. 09/08/2017 Opposition Download Memorandum filed by plaintiffs in opposition to motions to dismiss. 09/05/2017 Motion to Dismiss Download Motion to dismiss filed by defendant-intervenor State of Alaska. 07/28/2017 Answer Download Answer, defenses and affirmative defenses filed by defendant-intervenor American Petroleum Institute. 07/28/2017 Motion to Dismiss Download Motion to dismiss filed by intervenor American Petroleum Institute. 06/30/2017 Motion to Dismiss Download Motion to dismiss filed by federal defendants. Trump Administration and Trade Group Sought Dismissal of Lawsuit Challenging Revocation of President Obama’s Withdrawal of Atlantic and Arctic Ocean Areas from Oil and Gas Leasing. Federal defendants and the American Petroleum Institute (API) moved to dismiss an action in Alaska federal court challenging President Trump’s authority to issue the executive order of April 28, 2017 on “Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy” that reversed President Obama’s withdrawal of lands in the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans from future oil and gas leasing. The federal defendants argued that the plaintiffs had not identified a private right of action or waiver of sovereign immunity and that separation of powers principles barred the relief sought. The federal defendants also said the plaintiffs’ claims were unripe and that the plaintiffs lacked standing. API adopted and incorporated by reference the federal defendants’ arguments and also argued that the judicial review was not yet available under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA) and would not in any event be available in the District of Alaska. 05/03/2017 Complaint Download Complaint filed. Environmental Groups Challenged President Trump’s Reversal of Prohibition on Future Oil and Gas Leases in Arctic and Atlantic Ocean Areas. Ten environmental groups filed a lawsuit in the federal district court for the District of Alaska challenging the portions of President Trump’s executive order of April 28, 2017 on “Implementing an America-First Offshore Energy Strategy” that purported to eliminate protections for lands in the Arctic and Atlantic Oceans. President Obama withdrew the lands from future oil and gas leasing in January 2015 and December 2016 pursuant to presidential authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA). The complaint noted that in withdrawing the lands, President Obama and the White House had cited a number of factors supporting the withdrawal, including the need to make a transition from fossil fuels to address climate change, stresses to Arctic species resulting from climate change, and the contribution of withdrawn Atlantic Ocean canyons to climate stability as well as threats to the canyons from climate change. In their complaint, the environmental groups asserted that President Trump’s executive order exceeded his constitutional authority and intruded on congressional authority under the Property Clause of the Constitution in violation of the separation of powers doctrine. They also asserted that his actions exceeded authority granted by OCSLA, which they argued did not authorize presidents to re-open lands for disposition once they had been withdrawn.