Lawyers clashed Friday over whether the law deals with land use or environmental concerns.
SACRAMENTO, California (CN) – The United States government argued Friday that a California law improperly prohibits oil and gas drilling on federal land.
Adam Gustafson, principal deputy assistant attorney general, asked U.S. District Judge Dena Coggins for a preliminary injunction against Senate Bill 1137arguing that the state law is hurting government revenue and unlawfully infringing on federal sovereignty.
The law, passed in 2022, prohibits the approval of new oil or gas wells, or the reworking of existing wells, within health protection zones. In practice, this precludes wells from being within 3,200 feet of residences, schools, and hospitals.
Gustafson said the state has no land use power over the federal government.
“The federal government is taking a hit,” Gustafson said, adding later: “We think the financial effects are also immediate.”
But a lawyer for California argued that there is instead an environmental and public health purpose that the state can regulate.
Coggins made no decision Friday on the preliminary ruling.
The Bureau of Land Management is tasked with identifying and leasing federal land to operators who will drill for minerals, including oil and gas. State law casts a shadow over his interests, as potential operators are wary of leasing land that could become unusable, Gustafson said. He argued that the state could create new health protection zones where none currently exist.
Gustafson brushed aside arguments that there are exceptions that would keep the state law intact. The authority to grant those exemptions rests with a state agency, which he said delays action to approve permits.
“CalGEM is implementing this as a ban,” he said of the state’s Division of Geological Energy Management. “Nothing is foreseen to the contrary. They intend to stop drilling.”
An exception allows operators to have a drill outside a health protection zone and drill into it horizontally, as opposed to sitting inside the zone and drilling vertically.
Gustafson argued that the exemption proved that the law focused on land use, not environmental concerns. Also, he said that horizontal drilling is not viable.
Coggins questioned how a preliminary injunction, essentially a pause on state law, could help. Gustafson said it would provide operators with an indication that the federal government could win the case.
Operators who lease from the Bureau of Land Management are obligated to produce a certain amount of product — oil and gas they can’t get to without a permit, Gustafson argued.
“California knows what it’s suggesting is not workable,” he added.
Arguing for the state, attorney Jerry Yen said the federal government does not dispute that the law was created to protect public health. This means that its characterization as a land use law is incorrect.
Yen said Congress has not prohibited states from regulating federal land for environmental purposes. Additionally, the law does not target federal land and does not affect all federal land in California. Instead, it creates a buffer of about half a mile between drilling sites and homes.
“SB 1137 is not a blanket ban, so it’s not inconsistent,” he said.
Addressing Gustafson’s irreparable harm argument, Yen questioned why the federal government waited years to file suit in the case. She should have asked for a preliminary injunction when it was approved.
Attorney Colin O’Brien – representing the proposed intervenors, who include the Center for Biological Diversity – asked the judge to consider the irreparable harm communities would face by having oil and gas wells nearby.
The federal government’s lawsuit is similar to one filed in January in the Central District of California. two siblings argue that banning new oil and gas wells is an uncompensated taking of their private property. This lawsuit remains pending.
Subscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing arguments provides the latest on ongoing trials, major litigation and decisions in courts around the US and the world, while monthly Under the lights feeds legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.
