Menu
Kelcey Patrick-Ferree Law Iowa Minnesota header logo
Midwest Business Law Firm Serving Iowa & Minnesota
  • About
    • Who is Kelcey Patrick-Ferree?
    • Who is David Ferree?
  • Areas of Practice
    • Business Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • Contracts & Licensing
    • eCommerce
    • Privacy & Data Security
  • Blog
  • Resources
Close Menu

Contact Us Today

Iowa farm land

Eminent Domain and the Bakken Pipeline Redux

Justin Government Bakken Pipeline, Eminent domain, Iowa Supreme Court, Iowa Utilities Board

The Dakota pipeline carries oil from North Dakota to Illinois through Iowa, but does not pick up or drop off product in this state. A while back, I wrote a post about the pipeline and the fight over the use of eminent domain to acquire Iowa land for its construction. That post noted that in May 2016, the Iowa Utilities Board (IUB), over the objections of certain environmental groups and landowners, granted the pipeline company a permit for the pipeline’s construction. The IUB found that the pipeline would “promote the public convenience and necessity,” in the language of the statute. The IUB then granted the company the right to use eminent domain if necessary to acquire right of way for the project. The objectors appealed to the Iowa district court, which upheld the IUB’s ruling. The objectors then appealed to the Iowa Supreme Court, which issued its ruling on May 31, 2019, upholding the IUB’s decision, 4-3.

The initial question the Court needed to answer was who, in the first instance, decides whether a project “promotes public convenience and necessity,” the agency or the courts.  The Court found that the legislature intended that the IUB be the body that determines what projects meet the test. That being the case, on judicial review of the agency’s decision the courts, following general principles of administrative law, do not remake the determination. Instead, the courts review the IUB’s decision to ensure that it was not “[b]ased upon an irrational, illogical, or wholly unjustifiable application of law” and that its factual determinations were supported by “substantial evidence.”  The Court held the IUB’s ruling had met the tests; that is, it was rational and based on the evidence presented. 

Next, the Court took on what it called the most significant issue in the case: whether the use of eminent domain for the Dakota Access pipeline violated the Iowa Constitution’s prohibition on taking private property except for public use. The Court’s focus was on whether the public benefits of a project must be direct or whether indirect benefits are enough. In that regard, the Court found that, even though Iowans could not directly access the pipeline, the pipeline provides beneficial side effects in the form of cheaper and safer transportation of oil, which in a competitive marketplace results in lower prices for petroleum products for all, including Iowans. The Court noted that Iowa benefits significantly from lower fuel prices pointing out the very interesting facts that, “Iowa is fifth in the country in per capita energy use [and] eighth in the country in per capita gasoline consumption.”

The decision was not unanimous, however. Justice Wiggins, joined by Justice Appel, dissented, arguing that the use of eminent domain to acquire the necessary right of way for the pipeline that simply runs through the state is not authorized by the Iowa constitution “because the Iowa public cannot use and does not derive a direct benefit from it.” He argued that the indirect or secondary benefits to Iowa relied on by the IUB are not sufficient.

Justice McDonald also dissented, but on the grounds that the case was moot. By the time the case got to the Supreme Court, the pipeline was built and operating. Therefore, there was nothing meaningful for the Court to do. Or, as Justice McDonald put it, “What’s done is done.”

Upcoming Event: Local Government Law CLE Iowa Supreme Court Takes Conservative Approach to Airspace Hazards

Related Posts

Iowa farm grain elevators have height restrictions near airports

Compliance, Government

Iowa Supreme Court Takes Conservative Approach to Airspace Hazards

Connected-to-Midwest

Government

Upcoming Event: Local Government Law CLE

Government

Eminent Domain and the Bakken Pipeline

Recent Posts

  • Contracts in Disasters and Emergencies
  • Ideas for Businesses and Business Owners Unexpectedly Working From Home Part II
  • Ideas for Businesses and Business Owners Unexpectedly Working From Home Part I
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus and Resources for Your Business
  • Updating Your Website? Update Your Terms!

Categories

  • Business Law
  • Compliance
  • Contracts and Licensing
  • Government
  • Intellectual Property
  • Internet
  • Privacy and Data Security
  • Real Estate and Land Leasing
  • Social Media
  • Uncategorized

Tags

Advertising CAN-SPAM Compliance Contracts Contracts and Licensing Copyright Copyright Act Copyright Infringement Copyright Office Coronavirus COVID-19 Creative Commons Crowdfunding Distinctiveness Emerging Growth Company Eminent domain Fair Use Funding Platform How Do I Protect My Idea? Intellectual Property Internet Internet Law Iowa Iowa Supreme Court JOBS Act Legal Terms in Real Life Licensing New Terms of Use Nondisclosure Agreement Patent Pinterest Pinterest Fair Use Pinterest Terms of Service Pinterest Terms of Use privacy policy Service Mark Small Business Social Media Supreme Court Terms of Service Terms of Use Trademark Trade Secret Types of IP Web Sharing

How Can We Help?

Contracts & Licensing

Contracts in Disasters and Emergencies

Recent Posts

To schedule your initial free consultation,
fill out this form:

Contact Us
Checkboxes *
Kelcey Patrick-Ferree Law header logo
  • About
    • Who is Kelcey Patrick-Ferree?
    • Who is David Ferree?
  • Areas of Practice
    • Business Law
    • Intellectual Property
    • Contracts & Licensing
    • eCommerce
    • Privacy & Data Security
  • Blog
  • Resources

Minnesota: 612.568.5573

Iowa: 319.383.0659

136 South Dubuque St, Iowa City, IA 52240

By Appointment Only

© 2021 Patrick-Ferree Law, P.L.L.C. | Website Development by Vortex Digital Business Solutions © – All Rights Reserved | Contact Webmaster
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Disclaimer

The information provided on this website, including the blog, is not intended to be and should not be relied upon as legal advice. Using this website or contacting Patrick-Ferree Law, P.L.L.C. through this website does not create an attorney-client relationship. As a general rule, you should not provide any confidential information to any attorney until an attorney-client relationship has been established in writing. Please feel free to contact Patrick-Ferree Law, P.L.L.C. for an initial consultation, but be aware that this does not form an attorney-client relationship. The determination of the need for legal services and the choice of a lawyer are extremely important decisions and should not be based solely upon advertisements or self-proclaimed expertise. A description or indication of practice does not mean that any agency or board has certified such lawyer is necessarily any more expert or competent than any other lawyer. All potential clients are urged to make their own independent investigation and evaluation of any lawyer being considered. Attorney advertising.