About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1 1 (July 27, 2023)

handle is hein.crs/govemil0001 and id is 1 raw text is: S Congressional ______ R a esearch Service ~~~~~3 nfrrin 'ri lgltv baesn 114 Mountain Valley Pipeline Litigation Tests Congress's Power to Limit Federal Court Jurisdiction Updated July 27, 2023 The Mountain Valley Pipeline (Pipeline), currently under construction, is planned as a 303-mile natural gas transmission pipeline that would link natural gas fields in West Virginia to the existing Transco pipeline in Virginia. Mountain Valley Pipeline, LLC (MVP), the company constructing the Pipeline, reports that the project is roughly 94% complete, but it has faced numerous permitting challenges in federal court. On July 27, 2023, the Supreme Court issued an order that allowed pipeline construction to proceed while litigation continues. A key issue in the ongoing Pipeline litigation may be the effect of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 118-5, the FRA). Section 324 of the FRA sought to resolve the permitting issues related to the Pipeline by directing federal agencies to issue any necessary permits or approvals and by limiting the federal courts' jurisdiction to hear challenges to those actions. The legislation raises legal questions about Congress's power to regulate federal courts in ways that affect pending legislation. Opponents of the Pipeline argue that FRA Section 324 represents congressional interference with the judicial branch that violates the constitutional separation of powers. The federal government and MVP argue that the legislation is a valid change to the applicable substantive law and the federal courts' jurisdiction. This Legal Sidebar provides an overview of recent litigation involving the Pipeline, focusing on the separation of powers arguments related to the FRA. Pipeline Litigation in Appalachian Voices As outlined in a previous CRS Insight, construction and operation of the Pipeline require numerous federal and state permits. Opponents of the Pipeline have filed multiple lawsuits challenging various agency actions related to the project. Many of those cases have been litigated in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, the federal court with jurisdiction over the states where the Pipeline is being constructed. The Fourth Circuit has previously vacated approvals by the Bureau of Land Management, the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and state regulators that were necessary for construction of the Pipeline. The same panel of three Fourth Circuit judges has decided most of the cases Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov LSB11010 CRS Legal Sidebar Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most