Letter: Pipeline ruling was unfair to landowners
So the judge won’t approve landowners’ request that the court act to hold up pipeline construction because they hadn’t tried other remedies first.
“They cannot skip a step in the process and now claim justification by an emergency. Any emergency is of their own making,” district judge Jeffrey Farrell ruled.
It seems to me that the same judgment ought to apply to the pipeline builder, Dakota Access, who plead that they’ve already invested too much in the project to be stopped now.
How come Dakota Access could go ahead before all the affected landowners were satisfied?