US Government Calls on Supreme Court to Take Up North Dakota Ranchers’ Eminent Domain Case

WASHINGTON—The U.S. Solicitor General supports the U.S. Supreme Court taking up the appeal of a group of North Dakota ranchers who are fighting for payment of attorneys’ fees after battling a natural gas pipeline in court over the fair value of property taken by eminent domain. While the Solicitor General’s brief disagrees with the ranchers on the legal question presented in the case, the government agrees that the Supreme Court should resolve the issue.

“At this stage of the proceedings, the only question is whether the Supreme Court is going to hear the ranchers’ case,” said Institute for Justice (IJ) Deputy Litigation Director Robert McNamara, who represents the ranchers. “The Solicitor General agrees with us that it should, which is both correct and helpful.”

The McKenzie County ranchers fought for years to obtain a fair price for land a pipeline company wanted to take through eminent domain. They won—but then a federal appeals court told them that they would have to pay the cost of that three-year legal fight themselves. To get a fair price in court, the ranchers spent hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Most federal courts nationwide say that state law should apply when determining how much a private pipeline company owes for the land it takes. But the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals took a different view and said that the company only had to pay for the land, regardless of North Dakota law.

“The federal government disagrees with us on the legal merits, but that is not wholly a surprise,” said IJ Attorney Matt Liles. “This is a case about federalism and property rights, and the federal government is often on the wrong side of both issues.”

The Institute for Justice defends property rights nationwide and argued on behalf of homeowners in Kelo v. New London, a landmark U.S. Supreme Court case involving eminent domain abuse. Last year, IJ successfully argued at the Court on behalf of ranchers in DeVillier v. Texas. In that case, the state refused to compensate property owners after a transportation project flooded out their land. IJ is also currently defending property owners fighting abusive eminent domain actions in Missouri and Mississippi.