MinnPost published Marshall Helmberger's excellent editorial regarding Senator Smith's move to support the Polymet mine. You can read the complete editorial at:
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2018/06/congress-shouldnt-short-circuit-environmentalists-legal-challenge-polymet-l
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2018/06/congress-shouldnt-short-circuit-environmentalists-legal-challenge-polymet-l
America’s federal courts are supposed to be the great equalizer. While the costs of litigation can certainly limit the ability of some to have their day in court, the federal judiciary is, for many, the one guarantor of equal protection under the law — the one place where average Americans can stand equal with powerful corporations or an arbitrary or abusive government agency.
But what if only one side of a dispute had access to the courts? It’s not an academic question. It’s a reality that is playing out right now in the U.S. Senate, where Sen. Tina Smith has introduced a rider to an unrelated, must-pass defense bill that is intended to deny environmental groups the right to challenge the proposed PolyMet land exchange in federal court.
Whether you support the land exchange or not, it’s hard to argue that short-circuiting a long-established decision-making process is reasonable or wise. It’s even more astonishing that Sen. Smith, who has the backing of Sen. Amy Klobuchar and Rep. Rick Nolan in the House, would deny only one side their rights under the law.
PolyMet has always had the right to use the courts to defend their position, just as Twin Metals had the right to sue over the Obama administration’s decision to cancel mineral leases.
. . . complete editorial at MinnPost.
Comments
Post a Comment