Ninth Circuit questions executive authority over Arctic refuge oil and gas leases

The appellate judges noted that reversing a cancellation of the leases may not even do anything to stop drilling on 400,000 acres of once-protected land in northern Alaska.ANCHORAGE, Alaska (CN) — For years, the prospect of drilling for fossil fuels in Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has been ping-ponged between presidential administrations and judicial venues.On Tuesday, a Ninth Circuit panel wondered if an appeal by Alaska Native and environmental groups would hold any sway — since retaking office, President Donald Trump immediately reversed a Biden-era lease cancellation, putting refuge land back on the table for fossil fuel extraction.“Why does it matter whether the district court’s decision is vacated or not?” U.S. Circuit Judge Michelle Friedland asked Brook Brisson, an attorney representing the Gwich’in Steering Committee, a Native environmental interests group.The Barack Obama appointed judge repeatedly took to this line of questioning, wondering if the case was completely moot given that upholding former Interior Secretary Deb Haaland’s cancellation of the oil and gas leases wouldn’t prevent current federal leasing efforts, which are being challenged in a separate Alaska district court case.“Preserving the Secretary’s authority to cancel invalid leases is meaningful,” Brisson said.“For the purposes of, like, other leases out in the world?” asked Friedland.“There are a number of other leases that are administered under the same legal regime,” she said, mentioning lands in the western Arctic region of Alaska.Department of Justice lawyer Thekla Hansen-Young, on behalf of current Interior Secretary Doug Burgum and his department, immediately seized on the point Friedland had interrogated.“Interior has rescinded the 2023 cancellation effectively by issuing a decision in 2025 that reaffirmed the validity of those leases,” Hansen-Young said.Noting the ongoing litigation in Alaska federal court regarding active leasing efforts, she asked the panel to dismiss this case, saying, “The issues just aren’t presented here anymore.”U.S. Circuit Judge Ana de Alba, a Joe Biden appointee, and U.S. District Judge Robert S. Lasnik, sitting by appointment from the Western District of Washington, joined Friedland on the panel.Federal intent to plumb the reserve for fossil fuel drilling opportunities began during the first Trump presidency. In 2017, as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, Congress directed the Interior Department to establish and administer a competitive oil and gas leasing program in the area.Just before Biden’s inauguration in 2021, the state of Alaska, through a government-owned corporation called the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, possessed seven land leases in the refuge. The Biden administration would suspend these leases before Haaland’s eventual total cancellation — the inception of this lawsuit.This past June, the federal government auctioned more than 70,000 acres of reserve land. The Alaska authority won the majority of the land tracts that received bids, while private fossil fuel company Hex Energy LLC won the remainder.By law, 50% of proceeds from those sales went to the state of Alaska. Essentially, through ownership of the authority, the state received a half-off discount from itself on its own purchase.A challenge to the Trump administration’s current reserve leasing process will take place in October in Alaska federal court.Subscribe to our free newslettersOur weekly newsletter Closing Arguments offers the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world, while the monthly Under the Lights dishes the legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.Additional Reads