In a pushback against the Trump administration's push to restart pipelines off California's central coast, a state judge ruled that a recent executive order does not override state regulations regarding oil operations.
It's still unclear exactly what effect the ruling could have on pipeline operator Sable Offshore Corp., which faces a series of legal challenges from California authorities.
However, environmental groups hailed Friday's ruling as a “victory for the rule of law,” with Gov. Gavin Newsom calling it a “rebuke to the Trump administration and Sable's ploy to illegally use emergency powers to circumvent California law.”
Last month, the Trump administration invoked the Defense Production Act when it ordered Sable to begin operations and ship crude oil through a network of undersea and onshore oil lines. The administration argued that the order preempted several California laws, regulations and court orders that, for months, had blocked the pipelines from restarting.
In Friday's ruling, Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Donna Geck upheld a preliminary injunction issued last summer against Sable, prohibiting restarting the pipeline system until the Houston-based company complies with all state and local regulations.
“Nothing… allows a party subject to a [Defense Production Act] “To violate other laws,” Geck wrote in the ruling, citing case law from two other similar federal court decisions, which “strongly implies that the [Defense Production Act] The order, by itself, does not permit violation of applicable state regulatory law.”
Experts say Geck's ruling could indicate how other judges, including in upcoming federal court cases, may rule on the Trump administration's push to restart the pipelines.
Allan Marks, a UCLA Law School professor with expertise in energy law, pointed to similar challenges from the Trump administration's meddling in offshore projects, particularly East Coast wind farms, which courts have largely rejected.
He said Geck's ruling followed similar logic, reaffirming “that pipelines cannot legally restart without meeting state permitting requirements,” Marks said.
Sable has repeatedly clashed with state and local regulators as he worked to restart the pipelines, which run through Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Kern counties but are tied to three offshore oil platforms. The lines had remained unused since 2015, when a pipeline rupture caused one of the state's largest oil spills.
Trump officials were quick to support the project, arguing it will increase domestic oil production, especially as gas prices soar due to the war with Iran, despite ongoing regulatory issues, including criminal charges against Sable.
However, much of the project remains tied to legal challenges, including the future of a federal consent decree that is supposed to outline any restart of the pipeline and a claim by California that the company is now encroaching on Gaviota State Park.
Geck acknowledged the other ongoing legal disputes but said they do not diminish the court's authority, saying she was “deeply concerned about the failure to comply with the preliminary injunction.”
Sable had requested that Geck rescind the state court order following the executive order to restart the pipelines. The company argued that the federal order preempts any requirements from California regulators, including court orders.
Geck disagreed. It will soon consider whether the company should be found guilty of contempt of court.
“This preliminary injunction is another reminder that Sable is not above the law,” said Mati Waiya, executive director of the Wishtoyo Chumash Foundation, one of the groups that sued to ensure Sable complies with environmental protections. “We will continue the fight to protect our home.”
