Supreme Court: North Dakota pipeline case tests eminent domain rules
Landowners spent $380,000 in legal fees to win a fair payment dispute, and the high court is deciding if the state can force the company to cover those costs.
By Rosa Fuentes ·
The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in a case that could reshape how private landowners recover legal costs in federal eminent domain disputes.
The dispute stems from a pipeline project in North Dakota where the operator offered landowners less than they believed their property was worth. The landowners prevailed in the underlying payment dispute but incurred $380,000 in legal fees to do so.
North Dakota state law mandates that the pipeline company pay these fees if the owner wins. The federal government argues that federal law supersedes the state statute, meaning the company is not required to cover the costs.
Bob McNamara, who argued the case for the landowners, contended that private companies exercising eminent domain power must respect state protections for property owners.
He stated, “What we’re saying is that when states try to protect private property owners, private companies have to respect those laws. Even private companies wielding the power of eminent domain.”
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed skepticism toward this view. She noted that unless Congress explicitly applies state law, federal condemnation actions by any actor should be governed by federal law.
A ruling against the landowners would likely remove the financial incentive for owners to pursue fair payment, as they would risk absorbing all court fees in a losing or costly legal battle.
