Speaker 1: Now it's time for our daily Bloomberg Law Brief, exploring
Speaker 1: legal issues in the news. And the Bloomberg Law Brief
Speaker 1: is brought to you by American Arbitration Association, International Trade
Speaker 1: or Business Dispute Resolve Faster with the International Center for
Speaker 1: a Dispute Resolution, the leader in alternative dispute resolution around
Speaker 1: the world, i c d R dot org. Today, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Law host Doing Grosso discusses the future of the Dakota
Speaker 1: Access Pipeline after a judge allowed the U. S. Army
Speaker 1: Corps of Engineers to move forward with a full environmental
Speaker 1: study of the three point eight billion dollar pipeline. She
Speaker 1: speaks with Charles Warren, share of the environmental law practice
Speaker 1: at Kramer Levin Chuck. There has been a lot of
Speaker 1: litigation in this case. What is the legal question in
Speaker 1: this last motion? Well, I think the legal question here
Speaker 1: is whether the Army can basically now require an environmental
Speaker 1: impact statement, you know, after it had already been reviewed
Speaker 1: by the Corps of Engineers and they indicated that were
Speaker 1: not adverse environ mental impacts, and then it was reversed
Speaker 1: essentially at the Assistant Secretary of the Army level for
Speaker 1: Civil Works and and they asked for this environmental study,
Speaker 1: and I think that's going to be that's going to
Speaker 1: be one of the issues that they raise here. Trump,
Speaker 1: whose transition team has said in memos that he supports
Speaker 1: the pipeline's completion, could he seek to reverse the Army's
Speaker 1: decision to continue to do the study. He could do that,
Speaker 1: It's not that easy. One safe now said all right,
Speaker 1: we think that it's warranted that we do this study.
Speaker 1: And I think that would bring a lawsuit if they
Speaker 1: didn't suddenly say no, it isn't. But that conceivably could
Speaker 1: happen because I think that the new administration is going
Speaker 1: to going to want to proceed with this pipeline, and
Speaker 1: this is just sort of the last link of it.
Speaker 1: And the issue will be it could be delayed for
Speaker 1: a long time from their standpoint if you go through
Speaker 1: with this environmental impact. Ultimately, will the pipeline be pleaded
Speaker 1: in your opinion, I think it will be. Yes. I
Speaker 1: mean it may they may have to move. They may
Speaker 1: have to move this last segment, but I think there's
Speaker 1: places that they can move it. But but it's they
Speaker 1: built so much of it. I think it'd be unlikely
Speaker 1: that it's not completed. And if the Trump administration tries
Speaker 1: to move forward with it in this particular place, who
Speaker 1: can sue? Is it the Indian tribes that can sue?
Speaker 1: Are there other people that can sue? Yeah? I think
Speaker 1: the Indian tribes, and then there are others probably who
Speaker 1: have joined with them to the extent that they have
Speaker 1: standing to sue. They probably could, But I think there'll
Speaker 1: be a number of lawsuits to say, hey, the judgment
Speaker 1: was made that we hadn't taken a complete look at this,
Speaker 1: and we need to do more. And now you just
Speaker 1: can't turn around on a dime with no basis, and uh,
Speaker 1: you know, change your change your position. That's Charles Warren's
Speaker 1: share of the environmental law break is at Cramer Levin
Speaker 1: speaking with Bloomberg Law host Jun Grosso. You can listen
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg Law weekdays at one pm Wall Street Time
Speaker 1: here on Bloomberg Radio, and that's this Mornings Bloomberg Law Brief.
Speaker 1: You can find more legal news at Bloomberg Law dot
Speaker 1: com and Bloomberg Bena dot com. Attorneys will find exceptional
Speaker 1: legal research and business development tools there as well. Visit
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law dot com and Bloomberg, Bena dot com for
Speaker 1: more information,