Posted on 05/07/2023 10:31:23 AM PDT by CFW
SPENCER, Iowa — Iowa landowners opposed to proposed liquid carbon dioxide pipelines crossing their property won a legal victory Wednesday, when a judge ruled a state law giving surveyors the right of entry to private property is unconstitutional.
Ruling in a Clay County case, District Judge John Sandy said the law violated Iowa's constitution because it does not provide for just compensation for certain damages to landowners for their loss of the right to deny entry onto their land.
"The court can find no other reasonable interpretation in which Iowa Code (section) 479B.15 passes 'constitutional muster,'" Sandy said in his ruling denying Navigator Heartland Greenway's request for an injunction to allow third-party survey crews access Sioux Rapids landowner Martin Koenig's property.
The ruling is a win for property owners across the state, said Koenig's attorney, Brian Jorde, of Omaha.
[snip]
Navigator has applied for a state permit to build a pipeline through five states that would collect carbon dioxide from ethanol and fertilizer processors in Iowa, Nebraska, South Dakota, Minnesota and Illinois, convert it to liquid form and transport it under high pressure to an Illinois site, where it would be pumped thousands of feet beneath the surface. Many Iowa landowners have refused to grant surveyors access to their land or sign easements.
(Excerpt) Read more at nonpareilonline.com ...
Dig a hole and fill it.
Liquid CO2?
Consider that the states had originally decided that they did not have to respect the personal rights that they expressly "protected" in the Bill of Rights (BoR). The state obligated only the federal government to respect the rights expressly protected by the BoR.
So hypothetically speaking, if this case had been decided before the 14th Amendment (14A) was ratified, that amendment applying all constitutionally enumerated personal protections to the states, then the judge would have had to decide the case against private Ohio land owners because of no constitutional checks against state eminent domain power regardless of checks on federal power imo.
Sadly, even after more than 150 years after 14A ratification, some state lawmakers and attorneys evidently still don't have a grip (institutionally indoctrinated?) on constitutional limits on state and federal government powers.
“3. The Constitution was written to be understood by the voters; its words and phrases were used in their normal and ordinary as distinguished from technical meaning; where the intention is clear, there is no room for construction and no excuse for interpolation or addition.” —United States v. Sprague, 1931.
Iowa farmers have had a lot of struggles in protecting their land from confiscation of their land and resources on their land.
For example somè farmers built ponds on their lànd near a major east-west highway. These ponds are well over 100 yards from the hìghway beds. In some cases, 200 yards but some greedy gov joker wanted all that land and they tried to take it. The farmers of coursè said no and they fought to keep that land. The strips of land on the north and south sides of the road represents a llot of acerage, not to mention the water and any fish or wildlife in that water. The farmers won.
With Mr. Johnson at the helm of the farm bureau, they’re likely to continuè to do well. He’s an awesome man who deserves every ounce of support he can get.
“So hypothetically speaking, if this case had been decided before the 14th Amendment (14A) was ratified, that amendment applying all constitutionally enumerated personal protections to the states, then the judge would have had to decide the case against private Ohio land owners because of no constitutional checks against state eminent domain power regardless of checks on federal power imo.”
That’s a good, and interesting, point.
Over the past few decades, and the Kelo decision may have been the beginning, property rights of the citizens have been eroded further and further. I’m glad to see the judiciary pushing back on the encroachments a bit. Speaking of Kelo, there has been recent news regarding that subject property of that case.
They are going to deposit the lethal mother lode in solidly GOP southern Illinois, somewhere near Taylorville. It belongs, if anywhere, under Chicago, ideally under the Obama vomitorium. But the more likely hazard is that ANY leaks along the pipeline turn into Lake Nyos events. All done to remedy a non-existent problem.
I’d love to know what kind of damage to the environment will happen with these ridiculous “carbon sequestration” schemes. Pumping process CO2 with trace chemicals of unknown origin into the ground is bound to come back and bite us in the ass.
“I’d love to know what kind of damage to the environment will happen with these ridiculous “carbon sequestration” schemes. Pumping process CO2 with trace chemicals of unknown origin into the ground is bound to come back and bite us in the ass”
My thoughts as well. From what I read, this type of scheme is not exactly based upon a scientific consensus. Unless of course, you discount the opinions of anyone who disagrees with the climate cultists.
Also, a pipeline for oil is way too dangerous to our environment, but a carbon sequestration pipeline is of no threat at all?
“collect, convert it to liquid form and transport it under high pressure to an Illinois site, where it would be pumped thousands of feet beneath the surface.”
i wonder how much NEW atmospheric gets released from the energy that it takes to do operate all of the? how about the new atmospheric released to mine, smelt, manufacture and install all of the materials to build all of that infrastructure? I wonder if there is even a net reduction of atmospheric CO2 doing all of the above?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.