Fifteen states have filed a federal lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s executive order declaring a national energy emergency, alleging the order’s call for accelerated permitting timelines violates the law. In their May 9 complaint, the Democrat-led states asked the US District Court for the Western District of Washington to declare Trump’s January 20 executive order invalid.
Speaking to S&P Global Market Intelligence, Bracewell’s Scott Segal expressed doubts about some of the lawsuit’s claims. Segal suggested the states may have difficulty convincing a judge that Trump’s emergency declaration overstepped the bounds of his authority.
“The National Emergencies Act and Defense Production Act seem to give the president broad leeway to declare emergencies in areas implicating national security and industrial mobilization,” Segal said. “The interesting question is whether a court will find an emergency in current circumstances, but courts don’t typically second-guess the executive branch on emergencies.”
Segal also questioned the states’ contention that the emergency declaration, by calling for accelerated permitting timelines, will necessarily result in lower standards of review. “It’s important to remember — expedited doesn’t mean lawless,” he said.
More fundamentally, Segal said that lengthy bureaucratic delays in energy permitting is indeed a problem that needs to be addressed.
“Candidly, if American energy can’t get permits in under a decade, we have a permitting problem, not a production problem. This executive order finally calls that what it is — an emergency,” he said. “I fear that this lawsuit, by contrast, tends to treat paperwork as sacred and energy security as optional. That might be a little backward.”
