The North Dakota Supreme Court has made an important decision. It told a lower court to look again at a case about storing carbon dioxide underground. This case could affect future energy projects like pipelines, ethanol plants, and power stations. The decision is not the final word. But it gives landowners another chance to fight a law they believe takes away their property rights.
Table of Contents
The lawsuit
The Northwest Landowners Association is leading the fight. This group was created to protect property rights in North Dakota. In 2023, the group sued the state of North Dakota and the state Industrial Commission. The Commission is in charge of giving permits for underground CO2 storage.
The lawsuit challenges a law passed in 2009. This law says companies can store CO2 underground if 60 percent of the landowners in the area agree. This system is called amalgamation. The landowners say this is unfair and unconstitutional. They believe no one should be forced to give up property rights without having the chance to go to court for fair compensation.
What the Supreme Court decided
The Supreme Court gave the landowners a partial win. It reversed one district court ruling that had blocked their CO2 storage claim. But it also kept two other rulings that were against the landowners. This means the main fight about the 2009 law will now go back to the lower court. That judge will need to decide if the law respects the constitution or if it goes too far.
The outcome could have major effects on a huge project called Summit Carbon Solutions. Summit wants to build a pipeline network across five states to collect CO2 from ethanol plants and store it underground in North Dakota.
Why this matters to energy companies
Energy companies say storing CO2 underground is important for the future. They argue it helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions and supports carbon capture technology. Summit Carbon Solutions, Minnkota Power, and Basin Electric Power are all on the state’s side. They believe if the law is struck down, it could make carbon capture projects much harder. They also warn this could hurt North Dakota’s energy industry and economy.
Carbon capture is often compared to putting a lid on a boiling pot. Without storage, the gas escapes into the air. With storage, the lid keeps it contained underground.
Previous ruling against Landowners
Last year, Judge Anthony Swain Benson threw out the case. He said the landowners waited too long to sue. Because the law was passed in 2009, he ruled that the time to challenge it had already passed. But the Supreme Court disagreed. It said the landowners should still be able to bring their challenge. This cleared the way for the lawsuit to continue.
Now the district court judge will have to decide if the law itself is legal, not just whether the case was filed too late.
What happens next
Derrick Braaten, the lawyer for the landowners, said he was excited by the ruling. He believes it removes the roadblocks and allows the case to focus on the real issue: property rights. The judge could make a decision based on past arguments, or he could ask for new information. Either way, the case will now move forward.
Summit Carbon Solutions has not made a public statement about the ruling. But the company continues to prepare for its project.
Summit project details
Summit wants to use underground land in Oliver, Mercer, and Morton counties in North Dakota. These areas have the right kind of rock layers that can safely hold CO2. When the Industrial Commission approved the project in December, 92 percent of landowners in the 90,000-acre storage area agreed to take part.
Still, some landowners say their rights should not be taken away just because most of their neighbors said yes. They argue it is about principle and fairness.
State response
North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley said the state is ready to defend the law. He said the law respects private property rights while also balancing the interests of the public and industry.
In an earlier hearing, a state lawyer said pore space (the tiny gaps in underground rock where CO2 would go) should be treated like a shared resource. He also said the case could set an example for the entire country on how such resources should be managed.
Beyond Summit
The Northwest Landowners Association says this case is not just about one company. They say it is about defending constitutional rights for all landowners. Troy Coons, the group’s chair, said the focus is not on stopping Summit but on challenging the law itself. He believes the law is an unconstitutional taking of private property.
The group also points out that similar laws about underground gas storage could face the same challenge in the future.
Other parts of the lawsuit
Two parts of the landowners’ lawsuit did not move forward. First, the courts ruled against their claim that companies cannot enter land to survey. The Supreme Court had already sided with Summit in another case on that issue.
Second, the courts said the landowners could not challenge a 2021 underground gas storage law yet. Since no permits have been applied for under that law, the judges said it was too early for a legal challenge. Even so, the landowners believe the outcome of the CO2 case could set the stage for future challenges.
The bigger picture
Carbon capture and storage is a growing issue in the United States. Supporters say it is needed to fight climate change and keep industries running. Opponents worry about safety, property rights, and whether the technology really works long term. In North Dakota, the debate is sharp because the state relies heavily on energy production. At the same time, many farmers and ranchers feel their land and rights are at risk.
The Summit project has permits in North Dakota and Iowa. But it still faces opposition in South Dakota, where state regulators have not approved it. Minnesota has allowed only a small section, and Nebraska has no state permitting rules for carbon pipelines. This shows how complex and divided the issue is across the Midwest.
FAQs
What is CO2 storage?
It means putting carbon dioxide deep underground so it does not go into the air.
What is amalgamation?
It is when a project can move forward if 60 percent of landowners in an area agree.
Why are landowners upset?
They feel the law forces them to give up rights without fair payment.
Who supports the law?
The state and energy companies like Summit, Minnkota Power, and Basin Electric.
What happens next in the case?
The lower court will now decide if the 2009 law is constitutional or not.
