North Dakota Republican Attorney General Drew Wrigley looks over papers in his office on Monday, Jan. 6, 2025, at the state Capitol in Bismarck, N.D. (AP Photo/Jack Dura)
BISMARCK, N.D. (North Dakota Monitor) — North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley said he is researching what legal options the state might have against South Dakota, which he said is impeding interstate commerce by banning the use of eminent domain for carbon dioxide pipeline projects.
Wrigley called the legislation signed into law in March a “hostile act.”
South Dakota leaders on Friday defended the law that takes away the ability of carbon pipeline developers such as Summit Carbon Solutions to use eminent domain. Eminent domain is a legal procedure to force landowners to provide property easements for projects that benefit the general public.
Summit’s goal is to build a network of pipelines in five states to capture carbon emissions from ethanol plants and send it to North Dakota for permanent underground storage. The main trunk of the pipeline would run through South Dakota, where Summit has so far been unable to secure a state permit and has met significant resistance from landowners.
North Dakota has approved permits for the pipeline route and the underground sequestration.
South Dakota state Rep. Jon Hansen, the speaker of the House and a candidate for governor, sponsored the bill that Wrigley opposes. Hansen responded to Wrigley on Facebook:
“It appears the carbon pipeline lobbyists have found their latest puppet — and now North Dakota taxpayers might be being forced to bankroll a lawsuit against their own neighbors in South Dakota, all to help a private carbon pipeline company,” Hansen wrote.
“Unlike you, we are standing on the side of our people — defending THE PEOPLE’s constitutional right to private property over an out-of-state company’s desire to take what’s not theirs,” Hansen continued.
South Dakota Gov. Larry Rhoden’s office responded to questions about Wrigley’s comments by pointing to the letter the governor sent legislators in March explaining his decision to sign the bill.
In the letter, Rhoden emphasized his commitment to property rights.
Wrigley did not name Summit in his commentsm, but said North Dakota is considering suing South Dakota over its law.
“Because at the end of the day, the United States has a commerce clause in our federal Constitution, because to have a nation, you have to have commerce between and around and across states,” Wrigley said.
The attorney general’s spokesperson said Wrigley was out of the office Friday.
Wrigley, as part of the North Dakota Industrial Commission, voted to approve Summit’s sequestration plan.
North Dakota and South Dakota politics are both dominated by the Republican Party. Rhoden, South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley and Hansen are all Republicans. Wrigley and North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong are Republicans, who also hold a super majority in the Legislature.
But while Republican opponents of eminent domain gained influence in the South Dakota Legislature, Republican-led bills to curb the use of eminent domain failed in this year’s North Dakota legislative session.
Wrigley said he also would be reaching out to South Dakota leaders on the eminent domain law, along with Armstrong.
“I know that he’s going to be a great force and lead around these issues as well,” Wrigley said.
Jackley provided a statement Friday: “I will defend the laws and People of South Dakota, it’s as simple as that. The Legislature voted for the private property rights by wide margins, and Gov. Rhoden signed it into law. The People of South Dakota voted decisively on this issue, and I will support them.”
In addition to North Dakota, Summit has obtained pipeline route permits in Iowa and for a small section of Minnesota. Nebraska has no agency that deals with carbon pipelines.
The project would take advantage of federal tax credits for carbon capture. Summit says the project will benefit ethanol producers and the farmers who supply the ethanol plants with corn.
Comments