Fifteen states have taken legal action against the Trump administration regarding the declaration of an “energy emergency,” contending that there is no legitimate emergency and that the directive instructs regulators to unlawfully circumvent reviews of fossil fuel projects, which could harm the environment.
The President’s executive order issued on January 20th, “Declaring a state of national energy emergency,” mandated federal agencies to hasten energy initiatives such as oil and natural gas drilling as well as coal mining, while omitting wind and solar energy. He argued that despite record-high production levels in the U.S., energy output still does not meet the nation’s demands.
The lawsuit filed on Friday claims that President Trump’s declaration, which was lodged in federal court in the Western District of Washington, means that reviews mandated by environmental laws like the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the National Historic Preservation Act have been either expedited or overlooked.
The lawsuit notes that emergency procedures have traditionally been reserved for major disasters. “Now, however, several federal agencies, pressured by dubious executive orders, are attempting to widely implement these emergency protocols in situations that do not qualify as emergencies,” the complaint asserts.
The plaintiffs are requesting the court to declare the directive unlawful and to prevent the agencies from issuing expedited permits under the order. Attorneys General from Washington, California, Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, Massachusetts, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin have submitted the case.
“The President’s efforts to circumvent essential environmental safeguards are illegal and will be detrimental to the residents of Washington,” remarked Washington Attorney General Nick Brown. “This will not lower prices, enhance our energy supply, or bolster our national safety.”
Trump spokeswoman Taylor Rogers stated that the President possesses “the exclusive authority to determine a national emergency, not state attorneys or judicial systems.” She emphasized that Trump “understands that unleashing American energy is vital for our economic and national security.”
In addition to Trump, the lawsuit lists Secretary of the Army Daniel Driscoll, the head of the Army Corps of Engineers, and the federal entity known as the Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation as defendants.
An Army spokesperson declined to make a comment. A representative from the Advisory Committee on Historic Preservation did not immediately respond to inquiries for comment.
The lawsuit contends that declaring an emergency is reserved “not due to a shift in presidential policy,” and that this alteration would adversely affect the state’s interests, including clean drinking water, wildlife habitats, and historical and cultural resources.
Source: www.nytimes.com
