President Trump has faced many opponents during his quest for the White House and the early days of his administration. However, no group seems to be as powerful as the judiciary when it comes to gutting his policies.

Legal Insurrection readers will recall that one of Trump’s first acts as President was signing the executive order to move forward with the Dakota Access and Keystone Pipelines. The good news is that the Dakota Access Pipeline began shipping oil on June 1.

The pipeline’s developer, Energy Transfer Partners, successfully completed building the $3.8 billion pipeline in mid-May. The pipeline, which stretches 1,172 miles long, is expected to carry 570,000 barrels of oil a day. The Dakota Pipeline has partnered with the Illinois-to-Texas Energy Transfer Crude Oil Pipeline, and already has a commitment of 520,000 barrels per day from shippers.

The bad news is that a judge has issued an order that could impede this free market victory over eco-activist hysteria.

On Wednesday, however, a federal judge breathed life back into the fight against Dakota Access. In a 91-page decision, US district judge James Boasberg ruled that the corps failed to take into account the impacts that a spill underneath the Missouri river could have on “fishing rights, hunting rights, or environmental justice, or the degree to which the pipeline’s effects are likely to be highly controversial”

The judge’s ruling is laughable, given the dumping ground the Dakota Access Pipeline protest site had become. The leftist demonstrators were actually evicted because they were polluting the environment, and the cost of the subsequent site cleanup was over $1 Million. The protesters even abandoned a dozen dogs at the site.

Pipeline officials seem undeterred by the ruling, especially as the judge’s order won’t stop the pipeline from shipping oil 1,200 miles to Illinois.

The “handful” of the pipeline opponent’s claims that remain “do nothing to impact the ongoing operation of the pipeline nor do they undermine the work of the more than 8,000 individuals across the four states who built it,” said Craig Stevens, spokesman for the Grow America’s Infrastructure Now (GAIN) Coalition, representing backers of the project and infrastructure development.

“The Dakota Access Pipeline remains one of the safest – if not the safest – pipeline ever constructed,” Stevens said. “And while we have little doubt that the [Army] Corps will ultimately be successful in satisfying the court’s concerns, tonight’s decision continues the public saga of the project and jeopardizes ongoing infrastructure investment.”

Boasberg has asked the Army Corps of Engineers to provide greater explanation for its decision to issue the permits in an upcoming status. At that time, the opposing tribe (Standing Rock Sioux) will also present its arguments, including a request to shut down the pipeline immediately.

According to his biography, Boasberg was born in San Francisco, went to Yale Law School, and was appointed to his position by Obama. In 2012, he was the one who ruled that the public had no right to view government photos of a deceased Osama Bin Laden. I am concerned that the pipeline will be the next victim of the #Resist movement.

I would simply like to point out that if the judge were truly concerned about spills, he might focus on the vandals who damaged the pipeline in March.

As if all of this judicial activism weren’t enough, the pipeline will undergo a regulatory review this summer.

The AP reported that “North Dakota’s Public Service Commission is looking into whether Texas-based Energy Transfer Partners removed too many trees and shrubs, and whether it improperly reported the discovery of Native American artifacts.”

ETP said it has not intentionally done anything wrong, but the company could face tens of thousands in fines if regulators decide otherwise.

Let’s hope someone figures out how to stop the flow of judicial activism and needless regulatory restrictions one day.