Texas and other states cannot proceed with a lawsuit aiming to revive a key permit for the 830,000 b/d Keystone XL crude pipeline because the project has been canceled, a federal judge ruled today.
Canadian midstream company TC Energy canceled the $8bn pipeline last June and has already removed part of the pipeline it had built along the US-Canada border. That means there is no longer a "live" issue for the multi-state lawsuit challenging President Joe Biden's revocation of a presidential permit for the pipeline.
"The court takes TC Energy at its word that Keystone XL is dead," US district court judge Jeffrey Brown wrote, "And because it is dead, any ruling this court makes on whether President Biden had the authority to revoke the permit would be advisory."
TC Energy did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The pipeline would have moved crude from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Nebraska. The company last year filed a $15bn claim against the US for halting the project.
Biden revoked the permit on his first day in office based on a finding that building Keystone XL was not in the nation's interest. Texas, Montana, Alabama and other mostly Republican-led states filed their lawsuit about two months later, arguing the permit revocation was unconstitutional and exceeded his authority.
The Biden administration argued the case became moot as soon as TC Energy decided to cancel the project. But Texas and other states argued their lawsuit was still live because reinstating the permit would "certainly lead to the resurrection" of Keystone XL because of the economic benefits of the pipeline.
But Brown, who was appointed by former president Donald Trump, found that claim unpersuasive. The judge said it appeared the loss of the permit was the "last straw" for a pipeline already delayed for a decade, and that there was a "dark shadow of doubt" on the states' claim that reinstating the permit would induce TC Energy or another company to permit a new project from scratch.
Texas attorney general Ken Paxton, who led the lawsuit, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.