Rejecting the Trump administration’s push to restart oil pipelines off California’s Central Coast, a state judge has ruled that a recent executive order does not preempt state regulations related to oil operations.
It is unclear what impact the decision might have on pipeline operator Sable Offshore Corp, which faces multiple legal challenges from California authorities.
However, environmental groups celebrated Friday’s decision as a “victory for the rule of law” and Gov. Gavin Newsom called it “A rebuke of the Trump administration and Sable’s move to illegally use emergency powers to circumvent California law.”
Last month, the Trump administration invoked the Defense Production Act when it directed Sable to begin operations and ship crude through a network of oil lines undersea and on land. The administration argued that the order preempted many of California’s laws, regulations and court orders that had blocked the restart of pipelines for months.
on friday rulingSanta Barbara County Superior Court Judge Donna Gack upheld a preliminary injunction issued last summer against Sable, barring it from restarting the pipeline system until the Houston-based company follows all state and local regulations.
“Nothing … permits a party subject to a (Defense Production Act) order to violate other laws,” Gack wrote in the decision. He cited case law from two other similar federal court decisions that “strongly implies that the (Defense Production Act) order does not, in itself, permit violations of applicable state regulatory law.”
Experts say Geck’s decision could signal how other judges, including in upcoming federal court cases, might rule on the Trump administration’s push to restart pipelines.
Alan Marks, a UCLA law school professor with a background in energy law, pointed to similar challenges from the Trump administration interference in offshore projectsParticularly East Coast wind farms, which have been largely rejected by the courts.
He said the Gecko decision followed similar logic, confirming that “pipelines cannot legally be restarted without compliance with state permitting requirements,” Marks said.
Sable has repeatedly clashed with state and local regulators as it has worked to restart the pipelines, which run through Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo and Kern counties but are connected to three offshore oil rigs. The lines had been lying unused since 2015, when a pipe rupture caused the state’s largest oil spill.
Despite ongoing regulatory issues, including criminal charges against Sable, Trump officials have rushed to support the project, arguing it will increase domestic oil production, especially as gas prices are rising due to the war with Iran.
However, much about the project is tied up in legal challenges, including the future of the federal consent decree outlining any pipeline rezoning and a claim from California that the company is now encroaching through Gaviota State Park.
Geck acknowledged other ongoing legal disputes, but said they do not diminish the court’s authority, adding that she was “deeply concerned by the non-compliance with the preliminary injunction.”
Sable had requested that Geck vacate the state court injunction following the executive order to restart the pipelines. The company argued that the federal order preempts any requirements of California regulators, including court orders.
Geck disagreed. It will soon consider whether the company should be found guilty of contempt of court.
“This preliminary injunction is another reminder that Sable is not above the law,” said Mati Vaiya, executive director of the Wishtoyo Chumash Foundation, one of the groups that sued to ensure Sable complied with environmental protections. “We will continue to fight to protect our home.”
