A conflict over tribal rights in rural North Dakota has exploded into a new flashpoint for the anti-fossil fuel movement.

Environmentalists, tribal rights groups and anti-pipeline activists have taken up the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's objections to the Dakota Access Pipeline, creating a new front in the national battle over fossil fuel projects.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tribal heritage issues are still at the heart of the fight. But with a federal judge due to rule by Friday on a lawsuit against permits for the pipeline, the tribe and its supporters say they're ready to wage a broader battle, reminiscent of the Keystone XL campaign that green advocates won last year.

The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe sued in late July after federal regulators approved most of the final permits necessary for the 1,170-mile, $3.8 billion pipeline to move forward.

The tribe said the pipeline, which would carry Bakken crude oil to Illinois, threatens its sacred sites in North Dakota and poses a threat to drinking water supplies.

It asked a federal judge to block construction of the pipeline until officials can conduct a more thorough assessment of its route. Federal judge James Boasberg has said he will rule on the question by Friday.

The pipeline’s supporters reject the tribe’s concerns. They say the Army Corps of Engineers, which issued the permits now at the center of the court fight, did so according to the law and say that they gave tribal leaders the chance to engage in the process, but the tribe declined.

“This is not a cowboy process,” Dakota Access lawyer William Leone said at an August court hearing on the pipeline.

The tribe, meanwhile, has called the pipeline the latest slight against Native American communities in favor of expanded energy production, an argument around which supporters have rallied.

“Our Native brothers and sisters understand that as sovereign Tribal nations, we have the right to protect our sacred grounds and waters,” David Archambault II, the chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, wrote in an op-ed this week. “That right is recognized in the treaties we signed with the United States, and is codified in federal laws.”

The fight over the pipeline has grown into a national controversy attracting many of the same activists who fight expanded fossil fuel drilling and other pipeline projects, including Keystone XL.

“I think it’s a natural evolution of the climate movement,” said Tom Goldtooth, a campaign organizer from the Indigenous Environmental Network, a group that has helped fund and organize protest activities in North Dakota.

“We came off of an amazing win — for not just climate activists but for tribes, for landowners, for landowner rights — in the Keystone XL fight. This is the next step for us to demonstrate that folks are committed to stopping these fossil fuel projects.”

The movement has high-profile allies, from activist celebrities like Susan Sarandon and Shailene Woodley to supportive members of Congress like Sen. Bernie Sanders Bernie SandersJacobin editor: Primarying Schumer would force him to fight Trump's SCOTUS nominee Trump campaign plays up Biden's skills ahead of Cleveland debate: 'He's actually quite good' Young voters backing Biden by 2:1 margin: poll MORE (I-Vt.). Often, their arguments are premised on concerns over the expansion of fossil fuel production.

Opponents of the pipeline are also turning their focus from the courtroom and protest marches to the political area.

A coalition of 31 green groups wrote to President Obama in August asking him to step in and block construction of the pipeline. Environmental activist Bill McKibben penned a Wednesday op-ed in the Los Angeles Times asking Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton Hillary Diane Rodham ClintonJoe Biden looks to expand election battleground into Trump country Biden leads Trump by 12 points among Catholic voters: poll The Hill's Campaign Report: Biden goes on offense MORE to oppose the project, saying she is “[staying] silent about the drama unfolding on the high prairie, where native Americans are bravely resisting the further destruction of their water and land.”

Asked about the pipeline in India on Wednesday, Obama declined to take a position, citing the legal fight. Clinton’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment on Thursday, and her running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine Timothy (Tim) Michael KaineTrump meets with potential Supreme Court pick Amy Coney Barrett at White House Names to watch as Trump picks Ginsburg replacement on Supreme Court Barrett seen as a front-runner for Trump Supreme Court pick MORE (D-Va.), said he needed to study the issue more when asked about it by an activist last week.

“The epicenter of this fight is native organizing on the ground,” 350.org Policy Director Jason Kowalski said. “As allies, it’s up to us to connect that resistance on the ground to the halls of power in Washington, D.C., and to the elections.”

The project has the support of lawmakers in North Dakota, where the governor on Thursday asked the National Guard to help police anti-pipeline protests. Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) called Dakota Access a “legally permitted, fully-vetted pipeline” in an interview this week, and he slammed green activists who have taken up the cause as their own.

“They’ve been used,” he said of the tribe.

“I feel like the legitimate questions that were and are being raised by the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe are being diminished by this other movement that cares little to nothing about the North Dakotans living on the Indian reservation, and cares more about their anti-fossil fuel agenda.”

Anti-pipeline forces, including indigenous rights groups, say fossil fuels are a central component of their complaints about the project.

“This is yet another example of a mega-project that is not needed, given the president’s commitment to transition to renewable energy,” Goldtooth said. “This fits into the ongoing ‘keep it in the ground’ narrative of the climate justice movement.”

Dakota Access opponents are preparing for a long fight against the pipeline. Construction along other stretches of the line is ongoing, and protests over it are flaring up in places like Iowa. 350.org has organized an anti-pipeline march outside the White House for Tuesday. And Boasberg, the judge, has already scheduled a hearing for appeals to his ruling.

“We have learned that the only way you can stop these pipelines is if people stand up and they stand up very loud, and that’s exactly what’s happening in North Dakota,” Jane Kleeb, an anti-pipeline activist and founder of the group Bold Alliance, said in an August interview.

“It’s the perfect example. This pipeline would have been under the Missouri River yesterday, if it wasn’t for the people.”