Supreme Court reinstates major gas pipeline in blow to environmental groups

www.foxnews.com...

The Supreme Court struck down a lower court ruling from earlier this month that blocked construction of the 303-mile Mountain Valley Pipeline (MVP) from proceeding.

In a short, unsigned order issued Thursday morning, the Supreme Court vacated the July 10 stay orders from the U.S. 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, in which the lower court sided with plaintiffs — environmental groups Wilderness Society and Appalachian Voices, which had sued to stop the pipeline construction. The 4th Circuit ruling was opposed by the Biden administration, bipartisan lawmakers and the fossil fuel industry.

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., who played a role in securing the pipeline in the Fiscal Responsibility Act, filed his own amicus brief in the case on July 18.

"The Supreme Court has spoken and this decision to let construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline move forward again is the correct one. I am relieved that the highest court in the land has upheld the law Congress passed and the President signed," Manchin said in a statement Thursday.

This is a very important and vital project with natural gas to be transferred daily from West Virginia to the Mid-Atlantic and South-Atlantic of an estimated volume of 2-billion cubic feet. Not the best news for green and environmental activists who argue, support, and are in favour of energy-suicide policies.

A lot of jobs here....great news.

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

Great news for the sane people.
For the green and environmental activists it's a sad day.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

Great news for the sane people.
For the green and environmental activists it's a sad day.

Environmental activists aside, many land owners were upset the pipeline got to express eminent domain at the appraised value, just getting the slivers they need.

That is going to devalue the surrounding property, make it harder to sell if they want to, all while they get no royalties.

If private companies express eminent domain, there needs to be a profit sharing mechanism.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

Great news for the sane people.
For the green and environmental activists it's a sad day.

Environmental activists aside, many land owners were upset the pipeline got to express eminent domain at the appraised value, just getting the slivers they need.

That is going to devalue the surrounding property, make it harder to sell if they want to, all while they get no royalties.

If private companies express eminent domain, there needs to be a profit sharing mechanism.

I agree on this point made.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

Great news for the sane people.
For the green and environmental activists it's a sad day.

Environmental activists aside, many land owners were upset the pipeline got to express eminent domain at the appraised value, just getting the slivers they need.

That is going to devalue the surrounding property, make it harder to sell if they want to, all while they get no royalties.

If private companies express eminent domain, there needs to be a profit sharing mechanism.

I agree. I thought only the govt. can do eniment domain? Not a private company.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

Great news for the sane people.
For the green and environmental activists it's a sad day.

Environmental activists aside, many land owners were upset the pipeline got to express eminent domain at the appraised value, just getting the slivers they need.

That is going to devalue the surrounding property, make it harder to sell if they want to, all while they get no royalties.

If private companies express eminent domain, there needs to be a profit sharing mechanism.

I agree on this point made.

I appreciate you recognizing the nuance of that.

One thing we saw was a politicization of this issue, and that isn’t unique to this situation. It’s easier for entities to get their agendas through when they can draw lines between the people and have their eyes on everything but the ball. Our politicians had stock in this company, and the local police forces were always on the side of the pipeline, even if a resident was on their own property getting in the way of their “business”.

I live in the foothills of one of the areas the pipeline went through. One of my best friends parents had it go through their property not even 100 yards from their house. We used to go up there a few times a month and have dinner and drinks to disconnect from the hustle and bustle of daily life.

These people bought land in the mountains so they wouldn’t have to deal with constant city ordinance, HOAs, utility company’s redoing infrastructure ect.

Years before the pipeline came in, they started surveying the properties. You had to make sure your animals were put up regularly. You had to make sure gates were open, and many people would just be walking around your property frequently.

There are people who have pastures with cattle who had to move fencing and grazing for the work to be done, farmers with land that got cut through.

This wasn’t partisan, this wasn’t about the environment. This was an issue of private property, some of which that was generational.

And again, the biggest slap in the face is you didn’t get a choice. They got their sliver at the appraised cost, while you deal with the fallout. No profit sharing, and you couldn’t even opt to force them to completely buy you out.

There are no winners here.

originally posted by: musicismagic

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

Great news for the sane people.
For the green and environmental activists it's a sad day.

Environmental activists aside, many land owners were upset the pipeline got to express eminent domain at the appraised value, just getting the slivers they need.

That is going to devalue the surrounding property, make it harder to sell if they want to, all while they get no royalties.

If private companies express eminent domain, there needs to be a profit sharing mechanism.

I agree. I thought only the govt. can do eniment domain? Not a private company.

The rule is open to interpretation. Ultimately eminent domain is expressed when the public good ‘requires’ it. So railroads and such in the past have used it to make long stretches of infrastructure.

Though, many see it as an unspoken rule that when a for profit entity does such a thing, they compensate more than just value of the land. Whether that be through royalties (see pipelines in Alaska) or at least giving people more than the land is worth or accommodations in other ways. I’ve instances where they buy your whole property and then purchase you a new comparable plot.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

Great news for the sane people.
For the green and environmental activists it's a sad day.

Environmental activists aside, many land owners were upset the pipeline got to express eminent domain at the appraised value, just getting the slivers they need.

That is going to devalue the surrounding property, make it harder to sell if they want to, all while they get no royalties.

If private companies express eminent domain, there needs to be a profit sharing mechanism.

If anyone wants to read about the biggest clusterf*ck with “eminent domain” read all about Foxconn in Wisconsin.

Short version-
Private company comes in and want to build factory, promises loads of new jobs
Local government wants it and offers lots of tax incentives and will “take care” of pesky homeowners
Homeowners fight back, don’t win, get moved off property
Company builds, Doesn’t bring jobs, LEAVES, ABANDONS initial plans, jobs drastically reduced from
What they promised of 13 thousand+ to a measly 1400…

a reply to: JAGStorm

These sweetheart deals using government leverage need more oversight.

I’m libertarian by nature, but I’m a realist when it comes to these types of things. Sometimes it’s necessary like railroads and pipelines, but we need to have a focus on the impact.

We’re talking about people with generational homes and businesses. These are their livelihoods. At the very least, there needs to be good faith efforts to make these situations as right as they can be.

Problem is, we have lobbyists, donors, and politicians who have financial interest in such projects with no contingencies written in.

If these deals are chalked up, there needs to be more input from the immediate community it’s going to affect. There also needs to be rules set in for if the entity doesn’t completely follow through like Foxconn.

I work in the development industry. If a client, vendor, or contractor doesn’t follow through on a contract, they’re on the hook. The difference when they interact with the government using leverage of eminent domain shouldn’t mean they’re exempt, if anything it should be a higher bar.

It’s simple accountability.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

I’m libertarian by nature, but I’m a realist when it comes to these types of things. Sometimes it’s necessary like railroads and pipelines, but we need to have a focus on the impact.

I'm totally OK with things like that. What i'm not OK with is doing this purely for commercial development. It should be illegal.

a reply to: JAGStorm

True, it’s not like location is as demanding as a railway which has geographical demands. Manufacturing can be anywhere with the proper utilities and infrastructure… it’s a big country.

Wait...What??? I thought JOE was banning all things natural gas...? Lot of good this will do when there's no more gas heat/stoves to fuel

originally posted by: matafuchs
A lot of jobs here....great news.

President Biden will take credit for it, just like he took credit for curing cancer.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: AlienBorg
private companies express eminent domain, there needs to be a profit sharing mechanism.

As a small 'l' libertarian, I fully agree with this. I also believe that when private companies are involved, they should have to pay TRIPLE the appraised value, as well as a single payout of double the appraised value to all remaining landowners whose property values stand to be negatively impacted within an established distance of the pipeline.

originally posted by: JAGStorm
a reply to: CriticalStinker

What i'm not OK with is doing this purely for commercial development. It should be illegal.

While I agree with your statement as written, an oil pipeline is not purely a commercial development. That would be something like a skyscraper, a water park, etc.

An oil pipeline is extremely beneficial to everyone it serves, and is far more economical and environmentally friendly than moving oil by rail or trucks.

These environmentalist groups don't actually care about the environment. Just like BLM, alot of these groups are Marxists. Their priority is sticking it to the fossil fuel industry, even if it ends up hurting the environment. They'd rather the US oil and gas industry go belly-up and the world be supplied by dirtier oil from abroad, with increased emissions from transport, by workers with fewer rights toiling in awful conditions. They'd be thrilled with that outcome.

originally posted by: face23785
These environmentalist groups don't actually care about the environment. Just like BLM, alot of these groups are Marxists. Their priority is sticking it to the fossil fuel industry, even if it ends up hurting the environment. They'd rather the US oil and gas industry go belly-up and the world be supplied by dirtier oil from abroad, with increased emissions from transport, by workers with fewer rights toiling in awful conditions. They'd be thrilled with that outcome.

You may have noticed most politicians from all political parties were in favour of this project and wanted it to continue. They recognise how important and vital this pipeline is for the whole region covering many states, and they have ignored completely what environmental and green activists had to say. Not that it should matter but activism sometimes seems to affect a number of decisions (in a very negative way).

a reply to: CriticalStinker In South Dakota they are trying to use eminent domain to run a CO2 pipeline against many land owners wishes. At least natural gas provides energy, but I still disagree with eminent domain. CO2 is not even a pollutant in my book. Total grift. Phony environ-activists buying politcians on both sides of the aisle. If a project is really legit compensation to the land owners is just part of doing business. If they say no find another way.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

You said...

There are no winners here

I would wager the workers that will be able to afford more for their families would argue that.

Thats said I HATE eminent domain, as it is handled these days.