Virtual Resource Room Navigation
Case Law
The Dakota Access Pipeline-related cases
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is a complex case involving multiple parties and an important volume of court filings and development. For this reason, we only provide copies of the most relevant court documents and decisions to this case.
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USDC District of Columbia, No. 1:16-cv-01534)
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, a tribe from North Dakota and originally established as part of the Great Sioux Reservation, sued the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, claiming that the Corps’ permits granted on Jul. 25, 2016 authorizing the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) are in violation of multiple federal statutes, including the Clean Water Act, National Historic Preservation Act, and National Environmental Policy Act.
- Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief (Jul. 27, 2016)
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a motion for a preliminary injunction to halt the pipeline construction and asked for the revocation of the Corps’ Nationwide Permit (NWP) 12 as applied to the DAPL as well as NWP verifications allowing the discharge of fill materials into waters of the United States at several sites along the pipeline route.
- Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Injunction (Aug. 4, 2016)
The district court denied the Sioux Tribe’s motion for a preliminary injunction, stating that the injunction was not warranted here.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe jointly filed an emergency motion for injunction pending appeal to prevent the construction of 20 miles of the pipeline on both side of the Missouri River at Lake Oahe (D.C. Circuit, No. 16-5259)
- Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Sep. 12, 2016)
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals denied the emergency motion for injunction (D.C. Circuit, No. 16-5259)
- Order denying Emergency Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal (Oct. 9, 2016)
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a motion for partial summary judgment requesting the district court to “hold unlawful and set aside” the granting of the Feb. 8, 2017 easement and related permit decisions on the grounds that the Corps failed to prepare an EIS, and thus violated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and that such granting is “arbitrary capricious, and contrary to law”, and that the Oahe crossing does not qualify for streamlined NWP 12.
- Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Feb. 14, 2017)
The Corps filed a cross-motion for partial summary judgment in opposition to the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s motion for partial summary judgment.
The district court granted in part and denied in part the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe’s Motion for partial summary judgment and remanded the July 2016 Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact back to the Corps for further analysis. The district court also denied in part the Corps’ corresponding cross-motion for partial summary judgment.
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a supplemental complaint against the Corps challenging their remand decision issued on Aug. 31, 2018 affirming its 2016 decision to grant Section 408 permission to Dakota Access. The Tribe sought a court declaration that the Corps’ decision to affirm its prior environmental analysis was “arbitrary, capricious” and in violation of NEPA, APA and the Tribe’s Treaty Rights. The Tribe also requested that the Corps’ permits allowing the DAPL construction under Lake Oahe be vacated pending the Corps’ full compliance with the NEPA and APA.
- First Supplemental Complaint (Nov. 1, 2018)
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe filed a motion for summary judgment on remand
The district court granted in part and denied in part the parties’ motions for summary judgment and ordered the Corps to produce an Environmental Impact Statement. In addition, the district court directed both parties to reflect on whether shutting down the pipeline may be an appropriate remedy during the remand.
- Memorandum re Order on Motions for Summary Judgment (Mar. 25, 2020)
The district court ruled to vacate the Corps’ easement approval and shut down the DAPL. The court further ordered to empty the pipeline by Aug. 5, 2020.
- Order to vacate and shut down pipeline (Jul. 6, 2020)
- Memorandum re Remedy (Jul. 6, 2020)
Dakota Access Pipeline, LLC filed an emergency motion to stay the court’s Jul. 6, 2020 shut down order pending appeal.
- Sealed Motion for Stay Pending Appeal (Jul. 8, 2020)
The district court denied the emergency motion contending there is no basis for a stay.
- Order denying Motion to Stay (Jul. 9, 2020)
The Corps appealed the district court’s Mar. 25, 2020 and Jul. 9, 2020 orders to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (No. 20-5197).
- Notice of Appeal (Jul. 13, 2020)
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued an administrative stay of the district court’s Jul. 6, 2020 shut down order pending further proceedings as a means to provide the court with some time to render a sound decision as regards the emergency motion for stay. (D.C. Circuit, No. 20-5197)
- Administrative Stay Order (Jul. 14, 2020)
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted the administrative stay and ruled that a stay of the district court’s shut down order is warranted. The Appellate Court, however, rejected the Corps’ emergency motion for stay of the district court’s Jul. 6, 2020 order to vacate the easement allowing Dakota Access to cross Lake Oahe for the purpose of constructing the pipeline. The court asked the Corps to bring clarifications about how the pipeline will operate without the easement.
Appellant the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers filed its opening brief.
- Federal Appellant’s Opening Brief (Aug. 28, 2020)
Appellees Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe, et al., filed their brief.
- Brief of Appellees (Sep. 21, 2020)
Note: Oral argument was held on Nov. 4, 2020.
