‘We Have Strong Constitutional Case’ in Lawsuit Against Biden’s Keystone Pipeline Shutdown

...“Interstate and international commerce, according to the Constitution, has to be regulated by Congress not by the president,” Knudsen said. “And that’s really the crux of our argument here.”

“I think we have a strong Constitutional case,” Knudsen said.

Knudsen said it takes more than the stroke of a pen to put in place policies that impact millions of Americans in many states.

“Joe Biden doesn’t get to step in here on Day One, with no comment, no process, no talking to any stakeholders … come in here with a foregone conclusion and just wipe this thing out,” Knudsen said.

Knudsen spoke about what shutting down Keystone means in just Montana where 300 miles of pipeline already traverses across the state and many of those miles are in the poorest counties in the state.

“This pipeline project was set to become the largest property tax payer in all of these counties,” Knudsen said. “And was going to bring in $50 million to $60 million just in property tax revenue to the state and to these counties.”...

“That’s a huge shot in the arm for local governments, for fire departments, for roads, for police, for schools — just go down this list,”





https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...it-against-bidens-keystone-pipeline-shutdown/




The Biden order can be overcome in court. The state AG’s are doing the right thing. A president can’t cancel something congress already approved and funded. This involves an international agreement and interstate commerce.

 

I think the odds are high that a judge will issue an injunction prevention the cancellation of the pipeline while the case winds its way through the courts.

 

Good luck with that. The permit was issued with an EO by Trump, which allows for its own revocation in Article 1.

 

They keep pointing to what is a TEMPORARY "shot in the arm" for local economies. SOS, different day.

Well, take it to the courts and let is all hang out.

 

“Moreover, before Biden took office the pipeline was up and running because it was put online through Congressional action.

“[The pipeline] has been vetted for years,” Knudsen said. “It was actually already approved by the U.S. Congress once, clear back in 2011.”

“President Obama at that time had his chance to veto that bill and he didn’t do it,” Knudsen said.

“Joe Biden doesn’t get to veto it after the fact,” Knudsen said.

Knudsen said he hopes the lawsuit filed earlier this month with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas Galveston Division will result in the short term the judge issuing a preliminary injunction to prevent Biden from permanently shutting down the pipeline while the case is litigated.

The case is Texas v. Biden, No. 3:21-cv-65 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas.”
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...it-against-bidens-keystone-pipeline-shutdown/

 

The property tax revenues to the various state and local governments is not a temporary shot in the arm.

 

This is all irrelevant. The permit was issued by Trump. It was revoked by Biden. The permit itself allows for its own revocation. Congress approved it, but the POTUS must issue it. Why do you think it took Trump's signature if it was approved under Obama?

 

We will see him in court.

 

It's a frivolous lawsuit. The GOP is fond of these frivolous attempts lately.

 

When you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullshit...

 

If they had a case they would have sued Obama back when the law passed. It doesn't take a legal expert to see the bullcrap coming from the GOP. Amazing how easily their supporters are duped.

 

Blue states and democrats took Trump and his executive orders to court and had some success in courts favorable to them. Now the script has been flipped and red states and their AG’s are turning to favorable district courts contesting Biden’s arbitrary and capricious actions.

 

You don't get it. It's real easy to understand. The POTUS giveth and the POTUS taketh away. That's the law. Says so right in Art. 1 on the permit. It's an Executive action. Congress is powerless here. Explain why they didn't sue Obama back when the law passed? Never mind. Have fun with the GOP's current propaganda scheme. Nobody is listening except you.

 

Ohh, so now it's property tax and not the wealth of promised jobs the hustlers for this thing have been bull horning all this time.

Fact check: Did Biden 'destroy' 11,000 Keystone Pipeline jobs? :: WRAL.com

But please provide us with the PROJECTED stats on property tax revenue for the American people per local and state. I'll wait.

 

The pipeline is safer, uses less fuel and pollutes far less than the trains and trucks Buffett wants to use to transport the oil.

 

Proof that cutting greenhouse gases isn’t the real issue here.

 

I'm not arguing the pipeline. I'm showing how ridiculous this lawsuit is.

 

Since it hasn't been built, your "proof" is theoretical.

 

Many pipelines have been built and there’s plenty of proof that moving oil through one puts far less greenhouse gases into the air than moving the same amount of oil by train, truck, or barge. Regardless of whether the pipeline gets built, we will move the oil even if it has to pass through heavily urban areas on rail cars or on the interstates in tanker trucks. You will not keep the oil in the ground.

 

translation: Jeff can't refute the bottom line, accurate assessment of his statements, so he just doubles down with supposition and conjecture and finishes with some silly declaration of imagined defiance.

 

Wow, you blew by that question so efficiently. Bravo

 

Time to crush sleepy Joe in the Courts!

 

Then why didn't the courts allow President Trump to resend Obama's EO on DACA? The President has the right to issue a permits for pipelines. Those permits were upheld by the courts. Yet, Obama's EO on DACA enacted a new law in an act that violated the US Constitution. Yet the courts ruled that the President had to take into consideration the cause and effect in resending the EO. That same thing can happen here. But then when did a Democrat worry about petty things like the US Constitution. (Calling the US Constitution "petty" is sarcasm.)

 

The permit can be revoked. The wording of the laws and orders determines this. If Biden skipped some steps in its revocation, then the court can examine this, but I'm certain the administration studied this long before election day, so I'm not seeing a win for the R's. DACA is irrelevant.

 

Now you are just grasping at straws. DACA is absolutely relevant. Current Immigrations and Naturalization laws does not allow for deferments. President Obama enacted the law by way of an EO. The US Constitution is very specific on how a law can be passed. So, if this illegal EO can be blocked, then so can a legally issued permit.

As far as Biden researching the issue before being elected, I seriously doubt it. How do you research it while hiding in his basement?