Oil could start flowing through the highly contested $3.8 billion Dakota Access pipeline as early this week. The company building the Dakota Access pipeline says the project remains on track to start moving oil this week despite recent “coordinated physical attacks” along the line. Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners didn’t detail the attacks, but said they “pose threats to life, physical safety and the environment.”
Two American Indian tribes have battled the $3.8 billion pipeline in court for months, arguing it’s a threat to water. The company has said the pipeline will be safe. An appeals court rejected the Standing Rock Sioux and Cheyenne River Nations’ request for an emergency injunction to stop the pipeline from becoming operational.
Judge James Boasberg of the US District Court for the District of Columbia cleared the way for the startup, when he turned down two North Dakota tribes’ request for a preliminary injunction to prevent oil from flowing under Lake Oahe.
The 1,172-mile, four-state pipeline constructed almost entirely on private land is 99 percent complete, but a federal easement which was obtained in February-was required in order to finish the final 1,100-foot stretch in North Dakota. When complete, the pipeline will move crude oil from the Bakken field in North Dakota to a shipping point in Patoka, Illinois via 30-inch diameter pipes, and then connect to an existing reconfigured pipeline.
The pipeline consists of more than 700 miles of existing pipeline that has been converted to crude oil service from Patoka to Nederland, Texas. The two pipelines are expected to be in service in the second quarter of 2017.
The approval in February was granted after President Trump issued an executive order to expedite the process. The US Army Corps of Engineers originally granted the easement for the pipeline in July, but withdrew it in December under political pressure from thousands of protesters camped near the construction site at Cannon Ball, North Dakota.
The Corps abandoned the additional environmental review launched in December and argued in court that it undertook a two-year review of the project’s impact on water quality and historic relics, including 389 meetings with 55 tribes. The company rerouted the pipeline 140 times in response to concerns raised.
Greenpeace and a group of more than 160 scientists dedicated to conservation and preservation of threatened natural resources and endangered species have spoken out against the pipeline. Many Sioux tribes say that the pipeline threatens the Tribe’s environmental and economic well-being, and would damage and destroy sites of great historic, religious, and cultural significance.
Protests at sites in North Dakota began in the spring of 2016 and drew indigenous people from throughout North America creating the largest gathering of Native Americans in the past hundred years. In January, the Morton County Sheriff’s Department released figures showing the state and local policing of the protests have cost $22.3 million since August 10 2016.
Read more
Newly released research shows hate crimes in major cities across the United States rose by more than 20% in 2016. The data released by the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University, San Bernardino, shows there were more than 1,000 hate-related crimes committed in 2016—a 23% increase over 2015.
Another report released in February 2017 by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) monitoring group showed that the total number of hate groups in the US in 2016 grew to 917 from 892 a year earlier. There are now more anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-LGBT, white nationalist, neo-Nazi, neo-Confederate and black separatist organizations. The sharpest increase was among anti-Muslim groups, which grew from 37 in 2015 to 101 in 2016. The number of Ku Klux Klan (KKK) chapters, racist skinhead groups and anti-government militias and political groupings has declined, according to the report.
The overall number of hate groups likely understates the real level of organized hatred in America as a growing number of extremists operate mainly online and are not formally affiliated with hate groups. In the first 10 days after Trump’s election, the SPLC documented 867 bias-related incidents, including more than 300 that targeted immigrants or Muslims.
The Federal Bureau of Investigations defines a hate crime as a “criminal offense against a person or property motivated in whole or in part by an offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender or gender identity.”
Many major cities are reporting an increase in hate crimes since the start of 2017. In New York City, there were 100 hate crimes from January 1 through March 5, compared with 47 during the same period last year. In Chicago, the police department tallied 13 during the first five weeks of 2017 — more than triple the number recorded in the first five weeks of last year.
A coalition of civil and human rights organizations has created a national database and a hotline aimed at getting victims help — including lawyers. The effort, led by the Leadership Conference Education Fund and the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, is intended to build upon the work of the Southern Poverty Law Center, the nation’s leading watchdog against hate groups.
Eleven organizations have joined the effort, representing African Americans, Latinos, Muslims, Arabs, women and the LGBTQ community. Calling themselves Communities Against Hate, they will aggregate data in an effort to document hate crimes and provide victims with social services and pro-bono attorneys. In addition, a new Muslim-Jewish coalition is pushing the government to provide more data on hate crimes and focus on punishing offenders. The group represents an effort to get advocates to stand up for people of other faiths and ethnic backgrounds.
In recent months, incidents of hate have been directed against transgender women, Jews, African Americans, Hispanics, Muslims, Hindu Americans, Sikh Americans and others. Recently, 156 civil and human rights groups urged Trump in writing to respond faster and more forcefully to hate-based incidents. In his recent address to a joint session of Congress, the president condemned “hate and evil in all of its very ugly forms,” but critics have said he had taken too long to issue that statement.
Read more
New York City taxpayers will pay $75 million to settle a class action lawsuit against the New York Police Department over its issuing of nearly 1 million legally baseless criminal summonses over several years because they were under pressure to meet quotas. The summonses were later dismissed for lack of evidence. The settlement must be approved by U.S. District Judge Robert W. Sweet.
The suit was filed in a federal court in 2010 on behalf of people who were hit with 900,000 court summonses that were later dismissed because of legal deficiencies. The settlement would allow people issued court summonses for offenses such as trespassing, disorderly conduct and urinating in public to receive a maximum of $150 per person per incident for their trouble.
The lawsuit argued police were routinely ordered to issue summonses “regardless of whether any crime or violation” had occurred to meet quotas. It cited claims by two whistleblower officers who said they were forced into quotas by precinct superiors. The quota allegations were denied in the settlement agreement.
Under the agreement, the city said the NYPD must update and expand training and guidance reiterating to officers and their superiors that quotas are not allowed, and officers must not be mandated to make a particular number of summonses, street stops or arrests.
A total of $56.6 million would be set aside, and individual payments could end up lower if more claims are made. Any funds not paid go back to the city, which is also paying $18.5 million in legal fees. Possible class members would be notified through social media and other advertisements.
Lawyers for the plaintiffs called it the largest false-arrest class-action lawsuit in city history. The 2010 lawsuit includes summonses filed from 2007 through at least 2015. About one-quarter of the summonses issued during that time frame were dismissed for legal insufficiency, according to data in the lawsuit. Legal insufficiency is not necessarily a lack of evidence but may be that an officer wasn’t clear enough in explaining why someone was ticketed.
The class action suit came amid a growing outcry over the NYPD’s encounters with minorities. The lead plaintiff in the case, Sharif Stinson, said he was stopped twice outside his aunt’s Bronx building in 2010 when he was 19 and was given disorderly conduct summonses by officers who said he used obscene language. The officers didn’t specify what the language or behavior was, and the tickets were dismissed.
Read more
