Texas Republican Sen. Ted Cruz and other lawmakers filed a “friend of the court” brief on Monday urging a federal appeals court to reopen a case in which it revoked key permits for two major natural gas projects. [emphasis, links added]
Cruz briefly called on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to reopen City of Port Isabel v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) case, in which the court ruled in August to cancel the licenses of two major liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facilities in Texas. Saskatchewan.
The paper argued that it was Congress, not an appeals court panel, that should decide whether a new LNG export facility was in the public interest, and that the court's choice to revoke key licenses was based on “the whims of the most fragile 'circumstances.'”
“The panel broke with the court's previous decision and did so on an extremely important issue. The important role of Congress, not panels of experts, is to determine the public interest and codify it through legislation.” Cruz’s briefing stated.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit sided with environmental groups in August, revoking key approvals that had been issued by FERC. Specifically, FERC was found to have failed to adequately assess the “environmental justice” impacts of the facilities in question, among other failures.
The August decision leaves Texas' two major LNG export projects – Rio Grande LNG and Texas LNG – in limbo pending further litigation.
Cruz argued in the filing that the court's decision to revoke the approval rather than send it back to FERC for further work was the “wrong remedy” for the situation, given the procedural errors involved.
“The panel's error is particularly egregious because The group exploits the whims of the most vulnerable “environment” to undermine public interests in building LNG facilities“The Commission chose the wrong remedy – cancellation – to correct the regulator's alleged error,” the filing said.
“This decision and its use of vacatur are inconsistent with federal law and this court's decision. Together, they constitute a devastatingly wrong answer to a vitally important question: Who determines the public good?“
Read the break from The Daily Caller
