okiedo had mentioned a good post from Ricon on TOB recently. He's made another one analyzing some procedural aspects of the court case that I think are germain. I think most regulars on this forum also monitor TOB, but for those who don't, I'll quote Ricon's recent contribution regarding LAC's opposition to the injunction. From Ricon:

"Well they cut right to heart of it bringing up the APA (that's the Administrative Procedures Act of 1946). It is not the role of the court to impose its views or analysis, (the court is not qualified to do so) only to determine whether the permit application was reviewed on its merits by the respective agencies with regard to the laws. 'Highly deferential' is the appropriate phrase.

Its worth mentioning that the relevant agencies were, at the time of review, operating under several Executive Orders expediting the process for federal permits. Whatever you may think about the EOs, agencies are required to comply. Furthermore, executive actions are non-reviewable under the APA, as the presidency is not an agency. The EOs were explicit in that expedition must also follow all applicable laws and regulations. We must trust that they did.

In any case, those EOs may serve to grey the lines just a bit, but I'm also not expecting an injunction will be granted regardless. As has been mentioned, the decision will be one to watch.

I think many people see the current administration's revocation of the previous administration's Keystone XL permit and NWAR leases as a bellwether for future domestic resource projects. I think this is a mistake. The primary reason is that both involved oil, which is arguably the antithesis of the Thacker Pass project. Secondly, the Keystone permit was issued as a "Presidential Permit", which has the interesting quality of existing at the sole discretion of the office of the presidency. Thus, the permit was revoked.

I say this alot, but if this administration wanted Thacker Pass to be denied its permit, I believe the first thing they would do is instruct their Justice Department to withdraw its defense in the case. Done. Obviously, they have not done that."