The Nebraska Supreme Court reversed a lower court’s decision that nullified the controversial Keystone XL pipeline route through Nebraska Friday, meaning that Keystone XL once again has a legal route through Nebraska.

Four out of the seven judges on the Nebraska Supreme Court agreed with a district court’s February 2014 decision that Nebraska’s LB1161 law was unconstitutional, but according to Nebraska’s constitution, the court needed the agreement of a super majority — five out of the seven judges — to officially label the law as unconstitutional.

Nebraska’s LB1161 made it possible for pipeline companies, like TransCanada, to chose whether to submit their pipeline plans to the state Department of Environmental Quality, which would then bring the plans to Nebraska’s governor for final approval or rejection, or the state’s Public Service Commission, which had a stricter permitting process in place and didn’t depend on the governor for final approval.

Continue reading:  http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/01/09/3600136/nebraska-keystone-xl-decision/

Commentary by The Secular Jurist:  So, climate change will be greatly exacerbated because of a judicial technicality.  What principled priorities America has!  President Obama has pledged to veto the Keystone XL authorization bill now working its way through Congress.  I suspect Republicans in the U.S. Senate are hard at work securing enough support from Democrats that will enable them to override a presidential veto.  If this scenario plays out, Republicans will boast about their pro-business agenda, Obama will be able to defend his “pro-environment” credentials, and Big Oil will reap massive profits.  Meanwhile, the ordinary underprivileged people of the world will be left to cope on their own with an increasingly hostile Planet Earth.  Good luck.

2 thoughts on “BREAKING: Nebraska Supreme Court Ruling Upholds Keystone XL Pipeline Route

  1. I was reading in Naomi Wolf’s book “This changes everything” how climate change will hopefully be the one crisis which can create change because all people are at risk, and not just the less privileged. It doesn’t seem to register though. So sad.


    • Her work is truly outstanding, and I believe her premise of change through shared risk to be sound. However, potential risk might be insufficient to overcome the obstacles of intransigent interests (i.e. the fossil fuel industry) and dysfunctional government. What is more likely to effect change is a natural human reaction to the direct consequences of global warming; but, by then it will probably be too late to avoid catastrophe. As a species, we must figure out how to govern ourselves proactively. The costs of reactionary government have become too great for our technological evolution.

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s