California can’t ‘veto’ Trump’s decision to order Santa Barbara pipeline restart

In the ruling, Judge Wilson said the president's order, issued under the federal Defense Production Act, trumps the authority of California to shut down Sable's pipeline, despite a prior court decree that the state said allows the state to sidestep the federal government's otherwise supreme authority under the Constitution.

To find otherwise, the judge said, would essentially give state governments the power to thwart the president's power to set national security policies by ensuring the nation's "domestic industrial base" is not undermined and the nation's "critical infrastructure" isn't disrupted.

"If this authority were subect to de facto vetoes by state governments through the enforcement of conflicting state or local laws, or the federal executive were limited in its actions under the DPA by a need to proactively align all of its actions with existing state and local regulatory regimes, it would neuter the force of the act and compromise its policy goals," Judge Wilson wrote.

The decision comes as a key step in the complex, ongoing court battle over the fate of the Las Flores oil pipelines.

The pipeline had been shut down since 2015, following an oil spill under former pipeline owners Plains All American Pipeline L.P.

Following the spill, the state of California, together with the federal government under the administration of former President Barack Obama, sued Plains, and ultimately secured a so-called consent decree that essentially prohibited the pipeline from restarting unless the state of California signed off.

The consent decree is subject to enforcement by the courts, subject to a petition from the state of California or other parties involved in the case.

Following the entry of the decree, Sable acquired the pipeline from Plains and sought to restart the pipeline. According to court documents, Sable initially obtained the permits it needed from the California Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM), with concurrence from the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA.)

However, as Sable moved to restart the flow of oil through its pipelines, environmental activists sued, and persuaded a Santa Barbara County Superior Court judge to halt the company once again.

Following that order, the OSFM changed its opinion on the project, asserting Sable had actually not complied with all technical provisions required under the consent decree.

The OSFM is currently under State Fire Marshal Daniel Berlant, who was appointed in 2023 by Gov. Newsom. Newsom, like many of his fellow California Democrats, has made no secret of his animosity toward the oil industry and toward the use of petroleum and other hydrocarbon-based fuels, repeatedly enacting policies designed to either curtail or outrght outlaw the use of such fuels, in the name of fighting so-called climate change.

However, following the election of Trump, Sable challenged California's refusal to allow them to restart the pipeline, asserting they had complied with the terms and the state was essentially operating in bad faith.

The company, however, did not wait for the court's to rule. Instead, they restarted the pipeline, saying it was authorized under an executive order issued by President Trump, citing a national energy supply emergency.

Essentially, Trump's order directed the pipeline to order under the DPA, because the U.S. needed to tap all of its available supplies of oil to meet national need.

California, however, challenged that order in court, asserting the order was illegal and California's authority under the consent decree to shut down the pipeline should reign, instead, and Sable should be punished for violating the decree.

In his Aug. 19 order, Judge Wilson acknowledged that Sable's restart of the pipeline violated the decree.

And Wilson declined Sable's attempt to dissolve the decree.

Rather, Wilson instead modified the decree by transferring control over the enforcement of California law under the decree from Newsom's OSFM to the federal PHMSA.

He then ordered Sable to pay a penalty of about $1.45 million to California, accounting for daily penalties for each day Sable operated the pipeline from its restart to Aug. 19, the day the judge transferred oversight of the consent decree's terms from California to the federal government.

SInce the PHMSA continues to believe Sable was in compliance with the consent decree, the judge said Sable can no longer be considered to be in violation of the decree.

However, Wilson also specifically refused to grant California's request for injunction shutting down the pipeline, because he said the president's executive order under the DPA holds sway.

And the judge said this also bars the state of California from continuing legal actions to shut down the pipeline.

"... The DPA Order does, as a matter of law, preempt the enforcement of any state law that conflicts with Sable’s ability to operate the Onshore Pipeline...," the judge wrote.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta's office criticized the ruling, asserting it would allow the Trump administration to let "Sable profit at the expense of our environment and public health."

The state has filed a notice that they intended to appeal and ask the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn Judge Wilson's ruling.

Wilson was appointed to the court by former President Ronald Reagan.