March 27, 2025
Judge Overturns Biden Energy Lease Cancellations
Timothy Birdnow
So we finally win one from a judge.
Judge Rules Biden Admin Unlawfully Canceled Oil, Gas Leases in Alaska Refuge
Sadly I disagree with the judge's reasoning; tthe courts are not the ultimate rulers here and this notion that the Department of the Interior does not in any way have to get "approval" from them. IF there is a lawsuit and the courts say this violates the law fine, but essentially this judge is saying the DOI had to go to the courts and get their policy rubber-stamped. That is NOT the way this is supposed to work.
Of course it's not supposed to work the way it does, either, where unelected bureaucrats simply cancel legal contracts, but this is what happens when government is intimately involved in all facets of life.
From the Epoch Times:
"There is no reason DOI couldn't file"? There is no reason why they SHOULD file. The courts are WAY out of balance with their funciton.
But this is good; it means Biden's dirty trick has failed, at least as long as it's not overturned by an appelate court.
So we finally win one from a judge.
Judge Rules Biden Admin Unlawfully Canceled Oil, Gas Leases in Alaska Refuge
Sadly I disagree with the judge's reasoning; tthe courts are not the ultimate rulers here and this notion that the Department of the Interior does not in any way have to get "approval" from them. IF there is a lawsuit and the courts say this violates the law fine, but essentially this judge is saying the DOI had to go to the courts and get their policy rubber-stamped. That is NOT the way this is supposed to work.
Of course it's not supposed to work the way it does, either, where unelected bureaucrats simply cancel legal contracts, but this is what happens when government is intimately involved in all facets of life.
From the Epoch Times:
"A federal judge in Alaska ruled on Tuesday that the Department of the Interior (DOI) acted unlawfully when it canceled seven oil and gas leases issued for the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) because the agency failed to obtain a court order beforehand.
In a 22-page order, U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason stated that DOI needed to obtain a court order to cancel the seven leases that had been awarded to the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) before the Biden administration took office in 2021.
"There is no reason DOI could not file an action seeking declaratory relief in such circumstances,” Gleason stated. "Accordingly, Federal Defendants’ cancellation of AIDEA’s leases was not in accordance with law because it failed to seek a court order.”
AIDEA filed the lawsuit against the Biden administration in 2023 after DOI canceled oil and gas leases it won in January 2021, during the final days of President Donald Trump’s first term."
In a 22-page order, U.S. District Judge Sharon Gleason stated that DOI needed to obtain a court order to cancel the seven leases that had been awarded to the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) before the Biden administration took office in 2021.
"There is no reason DOI could not file an action seeking declaratory relief in such circumstances,” Gleason stated. "Accordingly, Federal Defendants’ cancellation of AIDEA’s leases was not in accordance with law because it failed to seek a court order.”
AIDEA filed the lawsuit against the Biden administration in 2023 after DOI canceled oil and gas leases it won in January 2021, during the final days of President Donald Trump’s first term."
"There is no reason DOI couldn't file"? There is no reason why they SHOULD file. The courts are WAY out of balance with their funciton.
But this is good; it means Biden's dirty trick has failed, at least as long as it's not overturned by an appelate court.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
06:56 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.
1
You're thinking maybe the court got this one right by accident? I'm inclined to agree with you. I'm thinking courts are less and less smart these days and only trying to thwart Mr. Trump; and if they happen to agree with him, like on this one, perhaps they are doing it mistakenly.
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at March 28, 2025 12:15 AM (QlyGH)
2
Perhaps so Dana. I certainly haven't read the opinion of the court and can't say, but it sounds to me from what I read that the court just tossed a ruling out there and it happened to work for Trump. But the WHY of it is incorrecct.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at March 28, 2025 08:18 AM (ouvFb)
3
Oh, and I agree; the Law has become secondary to politics in the judiciary. a hundred years of court-stacking by the Demoleft has turned it into nothing but a farcical branch of government, a legislature without elections.
We need to be able to do recalls on all judges, methinks.
We need to be able to do recalls on all judges, methinks.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at March 29, 2025 06:51 AM (fH2Nv)
4
Good idea!
Posted by: Dana Mathewson at March 29, 2025 10:44 PM (QlyGH)
24kb generated in CPU 0.1029, elapsed 0.7637 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.7568 seconds, 173 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.7568 seconds, 173 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
