An Obama-appointed federal judge in Alaska delivered a major legal victory to President Donald Trump this week, dismissing a lawsuit brought by a coalition of powerful environmental organizations seeking to block Trump’s reversal of Joe Biden’s sweeping offshore drilling restrictions.
U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Gleason dismissed the complaint on Monday, August 24, after determining that the environmental groups failed to establish a substantial risk of imminent harm.
Gleason was nominated to the federal bench by Barack Obama in 2011.
The case, Northern Alaska Environmental Center, et al. v. Trump, et al., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska under case number.
The plaintiffs included the Northern Alaska Environmental Center, Alaska Wilderness League, Oceana, Sierra Club, Surfrider Foundation, Healthy Gulf, Center for Biological Diversity, Turtle Island Restoration Network, Natural Resources Defense Council, Greenpeace, and Conservation Law Foundation.
The radical environmental coalition sued President Trump, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick after Trump reversed Biden-era withdrawals of vast sections of the Outer Continental Shelf from possible oil and natural gas leasing.
During his final days in office, Biden attempted to lock away more than 625 million acres of federal waters from future energy production.
The massive withdrawal covered federal waters along the East and West coasts, the eastern Gulf of America, and portions of Alaska’s northern Bering Sea.
President Trump rescinded the withdrawals on his first day back in office, allowing the affected areas to be considered as part of a future offshore oil and gas leasing program.
The environmental groups immediately ran to court, claiming Trump had exceeded his authority under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act and that his action created an imminent threat of environmental damage.
But there was one major problem: There was no imminent drilling activity.
The court found that there were no pending applications for geological or geophysical exploration activities in federal Outer Continental Shelf waters outside the Western and Central Gulf of America.
Judge Gleason concluded that the alleged environmental injuries depended on a chain of future government and industry decisions that had not yet occurred.
“Presently, the Court can only speculate as to whether any of the previously withdrawn OCS acreage will be included in any new oil and gas leasing program or proposed lease sale,” Gleason wrote in her 23-page dismissal order.
In other words, the environmental groups demanded that the court block President Trump’s energy policy based on activities that had not been proposed, approved, or scheduled.
The court refused.
Gleason granted the Trump administration’s motion to dismiss and ordered the clerk to enter final judgment and close the case.
“The court properly dismissed plaintiffs’ case, because they failed to show an imminent injury from President Trump’s reopening of the OCS,” Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Adam Gustafson said.
Gustafson explained that offshore energy development remains subject to an ongoing regulatory process and that political priorities or industry interest cannot turn a hypothetical injury into a concrete one.
Attorneys from the Justice Department’s Energy and Natural Resources Division handled the case.
The dismissal was entered without prejudice, meaning the environmental organizations could attempt to bring another lawsuit if a specific lease sale or exploration project moves forward.
The court also did not decide the broader legal question of whether one president has the authority to reverse an Outer Continental Shelf withdrawal issued by a previous president.
The Trump administration had additionally argued that the case was not ripe, that President Trump had sovereign immunity, that the plaintiffs had no legal right of action, and that there was no final agency action subject to review under the Administrative Procedure Act.
Judge Gleason did not address those arguments because the plaintiffs’ failure to establish standing was enough to dismiss the case.
As The Gateway Pundit previously reported, Biden moved during his final weeks in office to permanently block offshore energy development in a transparent attempt to obstruct President Trump’s energy-dominance agenda.
When Biden officially announced the 625-million-acre withdrawal on January 6, 2025, Trump called the move “ridiculous” and promised to reverse it immediately upon returning to office.
Trump kept his promise on day one.
Now, the environmental left’s attempt to use speculative claims and courtroom lawfare to preserve Biden’s anti-energy legacy has suffered a significant setback.
Drill, baby, drill!
Ad block users: Some site features may not work correctly while an ad blocker is enabled, because they break scripts and content this website depends on. If you can’t see comments below, for example, please disable your ad blocker.
Read the full article here