Activists fear the Dakota Access oil pipeline will pollute water and disturb sacred sites. A court is to decide next month if approval violated indigenous rights

Native American activists have said they are still hopeful they can halt the construction of a controversial oil pipeline that will run from North Dakota to Illinois, after a federal judge said he needed more time to decide whether indigenous rights were violated when the project was approved.



Judge James Boasberg of the US district court said he will make a decision by 9 September on whether to stop work on the pipeline during tribal leaders’ lawsuit against the US army Corps of Engineers for approving the Dakota Access project.

'We are protectors, not protesters': why I'm fighting the North Dakota pipeline Read more

The pipeline will run close to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe’s reservation in North Dakota and across several rivers, including the Missouri and the Mississippi, that supply drinking water for millions of people.

“Whatever the final outcome in court, I believe we have already established an important principle – that is, tribes will be heard on important matters that affect our vital interests,” said Standing Rock Sioux chairman David Archambault, who has previously said the project would “knowingly poison water”.

The attempt to force a temporary halt to the project came amid vociferous protests on the prairies of North Dakota and outside the court in Washington DC, where tribal members were joined by famous faces, including actors Susan Sarandon and Shailene Woodley, to decry the 1,000-mile-long pipeline.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Actors Susan Sarandon, left, and Riley Keough participate in the rally in Washington DC. Photograph: Paul Morigi/WireImage

Signs at the protest read “We are protectors not protesters” and “Obey your laws”. A petition launched by a number of young native Americans to stop the construction of the Dakota Access pipeline and protect water that is a “crucial part of our lives” has more than 94,000 signatures, including those of actors Leonardo DiCaprio and Mark Ruffalo.

After months of simmering tensions, protesters, many on horseback, have confronted massed ranks of police in North Dakota in the past week, resulting in dozens of arrests and a shutdown of the pipeline work site. Several thousand people from more than 50 other tribes have joined forces with the Standing Rock Sioux tribe at a protest camp at the construction site.

Energy Transfer, the company behind Dakota Access, has responded by seeking a restraining order against demonstrators, accusing them of trespassing and threatening workers, and by deploying their own armed security guards. Jack Dalrymple, governor of North Dakota, declared a state of emergency due to what he called the “significant public safety concern” raised by the protests.

The pipeline is a $3.7bn project to funnel 500,000 barrels of oil a day from North Dakota to Illinois. The project is expected to be finished by the end of the year but tribal leaders have raised concerns that the pipeline, which will run under the Missouri and Mississippi rivers, will pollute drinking water for millions of people and disturb sacred sites. In total, the pipeline will make 200 river crossings in four states.

Faces of the North Dakota pipeline protest: 'Sacred land is who we are' Read more

Energy Transfer has sought to calm fears by claiming that the pipeline could be quickly sealed off if leaks are detected and has promised “openness, honesty and responsiveness” with landowners. But opponents of the project point out that oil spills are worryingly familiar in North Dakota, with a leak in 2014 causing more than 20,000 barrels of oil to seep into a wheat field and landing the company responsible, Tesoro Logistics, with a $4m cleanup bill.

“Any delay is a win for us, it will give Dakota Access pause and it puts word out that Standing Rock still needs assistance on this,” Angela Bevans, an assistant attorney of Sioux background, told the Guardian.

“We’ve suffered incarceration, massacre and internment. This is just another chapter in the government allowing a private company to take something that doesn’t belong to them just because they can.

“It’s not a matter of whether there will be a spill, it’s when it will happen. Everyone knows what is at stake and we won’t be sacrificed. We are protecting the lifeblood of our people, these rivers are the arteries of Mother Earth.”

Farmers in Iowa have also complained about the potential damage caused by construction of the pipeline to the particularly fertile soils found in the state. They are also unhappy over the use of eminent domain laws. Dakota Access has denied that the pipeline will ruin livelihoods but work has temporarily halted in Iowa to hear the farmers’ case.

Texas-based Energy Transfer did not respond to a request for comment. In court documents, the company said the Dakota Access pipeline is 45% complete and that a temporary injunction to stop it would have “devastating short and long-term impacts” to the project.