Keystone Pipeline: Texas Judge Gives TransCanada Approval To Condemn Land For Oil Project

[TexasTowelie]

Source: AP

PARIS, Texas (AP) — The developer of the disputed Keystone XL oil pipeline, planned to carry oil from Canadian tar sands to Texas Gulf Coast refineries, may condemn land across a northeast Texas farm for the pipeline's right of way, a judge ruled Wednesday.

In an email to attorneys Wednesday night, Lamar County Court-at-Law Judge Bill Harris ruled that the pipeline would be a common carrier and that TransCanada has eminent domain rights to right of way across the farm.

Messages left with TransCanada were not returned Wednesday night. However, landowner Julia Trigg Crawford planned to appeal the decision to a state district court in Paris, said Tom "Smitty" Smith, Texas director of the activist group Public Citizen that is part of the coalition fighting the pipeline project.

In a statement issued Wednesday night, Crawford said she was disappointed that Harris "wholly dismissed our entire case with a 15-word ruling sent from his iPhone."

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/23/keystone-xl-pipeline-texas_n_1824893.html?utm_hp_ref=green

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. That is just disgusting.

I hope the planned appeal will overturn this misguided ruling.

[DURHAM D]

2. That is beyond fucked up.

[atreides1]

3. Yes it is.

This judge sells out a US citizen to a foreign company...while another calls for raising taxes to fight the US government in a delusional civil war...and both of these judges are from TEXAS!!!

[Conium]

4. Eminent Domain for a FOREIGN corporation?

Foreign corporations should NEVER have the right to condemn the property of Americans!

They should not be allowed to own land here either.

Does the judge think Canada is a US state?

[Curmudgeoness]

7. We never said that Texas judges were very bright.

He may well think that it is a state.

Welcome to DU.

[wordpix]

9. Sovereignty issue here, hope this is won on appeal

[TexasTowelie]

10. I agree that it is crazy.

Even the Teabagger candidate that ran for governor against Rick Perry is siding with the landowner in this lawsuit.

Welcome to DU and thanks for posting on this thread.

[liberal N proud]

5. when you have the money of an oil company, you get your way.

[oldsarge54]

6. Has anybody

has anybody re-challenged the concept of using eminent domain on private property for a private company's profits?

[freshwest]

13. Since Kelo v. City of New London decision in 2005, it's the law of the land:

Last edited Fri Aug 24, 2012, 02:43 PM - Edit history (2)

Kelo v. City of New London, 545 U.S. 469 (2005)[1] was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States involving the use of eminent domain to transfer land from one private owner to another private owner to further economic development. In a 5–4 decision, the Court held that the general benefits a community enjoyed from economic growth qualified private redevelopment plans as a permissible "public use" under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.

The case arose in the context of condemnation by the city of New London, of privately owned real property, so that it could be used as part of a “comprehensive redevelopment plan.”

This is the really disgusting part, other than the principle itself:

However, the private developer was unable to obtain financing and abandoned the redevelopment project, leaving the land as an empty lot, which was eventually turned into a temporary dump.[2]

The reaction and changes made after this, an apology to Kelo; and how the city lost tens of millions of dollars on this fiasco is at the link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelo_v._City_of_New_London

I remember reading of a case where a full community - schools, houses, churches, libraries were seized to be razed o give room to a new Toyota auto factory and parking lot. It was all condemned. There was an interview with a priest at an Orthodox Church who was a refugee from Russia. He claimed that not even Stalin would have dared to do such a thing.

There was a story of a neighborhood where people, like this place in CT which took Kelo's home, where the city condemned a post WW2 era neighborhood that was well kept, in which the people had lived and worked and thought they'd get to retire as they'd paid off their homes. The reasons were arbitrary, such as the homes only had 2 bedrooms and one bathroom, much like my old home was. The residents tried to get help, but it was done anyway.

That is part of the reason, IMO, that fracking is being allowed because the US SC did this, despite some changes being made. I remember the days when eminent domain was used to build bridges, roads, etc. but under public ownership and accountable, part of the Commons.

Instead we have global corporations interfering with people who have played by all the rules, and as we can see from Romney, they do not mean the people any good. But a few pockets will get fatter, and that is who will vote for Romney.

Now it's for the corporations which can be fly by night, irresponsible 'persons' and are not be trusted. They will, like Bain, leave a community in bad straits if it is good for their bottom line. Our communities and people deserve much better than this.

[oldsarge54]

14. Follow the Republican Example

Well, if the Republicans can spend decades and millions fighting Roe v Wade because they think is is wrong, can't we put a little effort into overturning Kelo v City of New London. At least we'd be fighting for individual freedom of landowners, instead of taking away the right to choose from women. I mean this is real cronies capitalism, as opposed to what the Republicans are charging Obama with.

[freshwest]

15. Many states changed their own eminent domain laws to stop this happening. In Kelo, both the CT..

Supreme Court pursued the claim and everyone apologized. Texas did strengthen their laws. But it has been going on for a while, where polluters are uncontrolled, ground water contaminated, wells gone dry as a business drains the water table, and people finally gave up and moved. It's generally done, taking down one person at a time, quietly.

When 'city fathers' are reciting the 'what's good for business is good for the country' mantra, it's like talking to a brick wall. The dream of people to work all their lives, save and retire in the country, do what they wanted to do most of their lives, weren't in a position to do because they weren't born with land or money, is not respected.

The USA is being run for the benefit of the global companies, overturning our laws is obvious from the time of the WTO treaty being signed. We didn't mind the overturn of democratically elected governments of other countries, as we were told they were socialist or communist, thus our enemy or working against the American interests and those interests? IMHO, they were these global corporations, not anything that would protect the USA or values.

Progressive legislation of states against allowing the sale of goods made by child, prison and slave labor abroad were overturned, specifically by WTO courts. Many fortunes were made by Americans who worked for the corporations importing these goods. They have championed the removal of all trade and immigration barriers, which is a libertarian policy. They see labor as a commodity, which includes people.

That is their view of freedom and liberty, but it is destructive and selfish. They have a bigger voice under different labels in this country than the rest of us that they curse as 'statists' who would dare to infringe on their freedom to get as rich as possible no matter what happens to their neighbors. They rail against the government as they rob their fellow citizens.

There are small groups opposing these land grabs in all states, not just Texas. But the problem is they are libertarian and pro-business. So they aren't going to change a thing.

[Angry Dragon]

8. ashole company, asshole judge

none of this oil is going to be sold in this country, so how does that benefit the US??

[Archae]

11. I smell bribes.

[sakabatou]

12. WTF?!