The $8 billion Keystone XL oil pipeline will be argued in federal court in Great Falls on Wednesday as the Trump administration pushes forward with a project killed by former President Barack Obama.

Northern Plains Resource Council, Bold Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and Sierra Club filed a lawsuit against the government over its issuing of a permit for the project in March, following Trump’s November election win.

“Plaintiffs are not-for-profit organizations dedicated to protecting the environment, public health and the rural landowners and landscapes of the Great Plains,” the groups say in court filings.

They’re suing Thomas A. Shannon Jr., under secretary for political affairs for the State Department, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, arguing a permit for the pipeline was issued without sufficient environmental review in violation of federal laws.

A motion by the government to dismiss the case will be heard before District Judge Brian M. Morris.

“The main issue is whether or not the court has jurisdiction over this lawsuit,” said Doug Hayes, a senior attorney for the Sierra Club.

Issuing a presidential permit for an international crossing is an exercise of the president’s authority over foreign affairs and national security and therefore can't be reviewed, the government’s court filings say.

In March, Under Secretary Shannon issued the cross-border permit for the project.

That followed a presidential memorandum by Trump inviting TransCanada to re-submit its application to the State Department and directing the State Department to make a final decision in 60 days.

“Courts routinely defer to the executive branch’s exercise of its authority over foreign affairs and national security,” the Trump administration says in its court filings in support of dismissing the lawsuit.

Montana tribes seek Keystone route change

Even if the plaintiffs had challenged an agency action, the court wouldn’t have jurisdiction because the law gives agencies certain discretion, the government says.

“In making this determination, the under secretary weighed a number of factors, including the project’s contribution to energy security, Canada’s role as a trading partner and ally, foreign policy implications, economic benefits and environmental and cultural impacts,” the government argues. “None of these factors is dictated by statute; indeed, there is no governing statute or any other meaningful standard for the court to apply to the review of the under secretary’s decision.”

The environmental groups say the court has jurisdiction.

“The State Department suggests that the more squarely an agency decision implicates our ‘national interest,’ the less power the public and courts should have to question it,” they write in court papers. “But that is not the judgment Congress has made.”

That keystone XL threatens so many people and resources and implicates our ‘broad national welfare,’ it’s up to the court to ensure that federal agencies comply with laws that require them to study and mitigate the environmental impacts, they argue.

Terry Cunha, a spokesman for developer TransCanada, which has intervened in the case on the side of the government, said the company has all the permits it needs to begin construction in the second half of 2018 except route approval in Nebraska from the Public Service Commission. The PSC has until Nov. 23 to make a decision, he said.

“Overall, we’ve clearly demonstrated the need of the project,” Cunha said.

The 36-inch crude oil pipeline would extend 1,204 miles from Hardisty, Alberta, to Steele City, Neb., and link up with existing pipelines to Gulf Coast refineries.

The 280-mile Montana portion of the project would extend across Phillips, Valley, McCone, Dawson and Fallon counties.

Hayes, the Sierra Club attorney, said the lawsuit was filed here because the project would cross the international border near Morgan in northeastern Montana.

In November 2015, citing threats to the climate and communities and natural areas, the Obama administration State Department denied TransCanada’s application for a cross-border presidential permit for the pipeline.

In denying the permit, it relied on an environmental impact statement completed in 2014.

The environmental groups filed suit March 30 in federal court in Great Falls after Trump revived the pipeline.

They contend in the lawsuit that the State Department violated the National Environmental Policy Act when it issued the permit.

The groups say that environmental study had grown stale, and was out of date by the time the Trump administration approved the permit.

Opponents of the pipeline say they’re planning to rally against it at the Civic Center in Great Falls prior to the federal court hearing.

A second lawsuit challenging the Keystone project also was filed by the Indigenous Environmental Network and the North Coast Rivers Alliance.

The two lawsuits have been consolidated and will be heard at the same time.

READ MORE:

Keystone XL survived politics but economics could kill it

Lawsuit challenging Keystone pipeline filed in Great Falls

Dozens rally against Keystone XL Pipeline on Fort Peck Reservation