government allows it to happen.

Just wait until President Obama signs the TPP.

Last edited Sun Dec 14, 2014, 08:14 AM - Edit history (2)

Kind of the nature of the right-of-way beast.

OTOH with oil below $60 this may be moot for a while.

EDIT: in fairness to merrily's point downthread: this is Nebraska state law which has little if any history of international right-of-way easement claims, so it's certainly not "old hat" in that sense.

However it's happened in three other pipeline crossings from Canada. Its use in Nebraska is unusual because Canada hasn't really cared before where the oil goes once it's south of the 48th parallel before.

right-of-way can fall back on eminent domain to execute that right-of-way.

Actually since this is state law in Nebraska I have no idea what the precedent is, because I imagine Nebraska's legal history with international claimants to right-of-way is probably nil except possibly for the Omaha airport.

Just from the pipeline example, of the 58 (if I recall that right) oil pipeline crossings between Canada and the US only 3 required eminent domain proceedings, and I actually think only 2 of those went forward under eminent domain rather than settlement.

Also, I edited my original post here to agree with you, that this is kind of legally novel in Nebraska. It's just that the framework has been tested in other states multiple times before.

eminent domain in the US in any state or not? Please give links to the instances where you claim that has happened. Thank you.

As the OP pointed out in its own 2nd paragraph, this falls out of a state law that grants a right-of-way to Trans-Canada or whatever the hell they're calling themselves this week.

exercise the power of eminent domain against owners of land in the US, as the title of the OP asks? Your original reply made that seem ho hum.

The Nebraska State Legislature is doing so, or rather threatening to do so.

This set-up, by which a state legislature goes to bat for a foreign company in a transportation project, is not terribly novel, but doesn't often happen in Nebraska.

Are you asking me to demonstrate the foreign projects that are agreed to by US law and treaty have eminent domain rights?

Does it describe a ho hum event?

Usually the threat of eminent domain proceedings are enough to just get owners to sell. Though that's probably a mistake on the owners' part because eminent domain rebuttals have a pretty decent record in court.

Is that my third or fourth request?

The Nebraska State Legislature is.

That is why I asked you for a link.

I won't make that mistake again.

I assumed he meant "how can a state legislature grant eminent domain rights for a project with foreign backing".

So, OP, if you're still here: no foreign company can directly exercise eminent domain, and that's not what is happening here.

So, I'll start over:

"A foreign corporation cannot directly assert eminent domain in the US."

Do we all agree on that?

domain so far. I don't know how far corporatists will go eventually, though. However far it is, I'm sure Scalia will decide the Framers agreed all along.

it is ALWAYS the gov't ... sometimes acting on behalf of a corporation...

i don't see where the poster you're discussing this with has any understanding of how eminent domain works...

sP

So, just to start over from square one: we all agree that no non-governmental entity can assert eminent domain within the US.

looks like i must have missed something...

sP

The Keystone XL extension is an attempt to shorten the total pipeline route required.

I swear, for people who care so much about this, DUers seem to know very little about it.

As it is, the oil goes by pipeline and train out to the mouth of the St. Lawrence and to various refineries in the US. That will remain true whether or not the XL extension is approved.

Did you not spam the top half of this thread displaying the fact you have no idea what you're talking about? I think you did.

I was reading something the other day which said that the US is trying to keep Europe dependent on us rather than becoming a geopolitical rival -- and part of that involves making them dependent on US energy supplies rather than turning to Russia.

The actual result, of course, is that Russia and China are getting more buddy-buddy with one another than they have been in decades. And the Europeans are getting restive and starting to wonder why NATO not only still exists but has turned into an arm of American military dominance. But that hasn't gotten through to US policy makers.

It's the Grand Game, and everything from Keystone to the TPP and TTIP is part of it. In the long run, it can't possibly work, but it will screw over a lot of ordinary people in the process.

Most of us believe it is not, so eminent domain should not be applied to the pipeline even if it were a US company requesting it.

"he 2012 state law that let Gov. Dave Heineman give final approval of the proposed Keystone XL route"

And now we have super-sized NAFTA, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, about to be fast-tracked by Republicans and our "liberal" president...

Enbridge sued a North Dakota landowner who refused to let Enbridge survey his land. Enbridge won. The landowner later refused to grant the company an easement to use his land, and Enbridge filed a lawsuit to claim it under eminent domain. A jury trial begins in May 2015.

Sandpiper further endangers the Great Lakes Basin and Lake Superior - it would transport 4 million barrels of oil a day - more than 4 times what Keystone would. http://www.honorearth.org/enbridge_sandpiper_pipeline

Lawsuit information is from current issue of In These Times.