- Start
- Aug 20, 202690% CONFIDENCEfrom the source
California Appeals the Ruling That Keeps Sable's Pipeline Running Under the DPA
- On 20 August 2026 the State of California filed notice of appeal from the Central District of California's order denying its motion for a preliminary injunction and stay against Energy Secretary Chris Wright's Pipeline Capacity Prioritization and Allocation Order under the Defense Production Act (State of California v. Wright, 2:26-cv-03396)[1][4]
- The day before, the court found California had failed to show 'even serious questions on the merits' of the order's validity[1]
- In the same 19 August order the court swapped PHMSA in for the State Fire Marshal as the consent decree's pipeline regulator, found Sable violated the decree by restarting without the Fire Marshal's authorization and fined it $1.449 million instead of ordering a shutdown[1]
- It also declared that the DPA order bars California State Parks from suing to stop Sable operating the onshore Santa Ynez Pipeline System; State Parks filed its own notice of appeal on 21 August[1]
- Judge Stephen V. Wilson held that the DPA order preempted state environmental regulations[4]; Vinson & Elkins reads the ruling as holding that the DPA generally preempts state laws that would prevent compliance with a DPA order[2]
- Attorney General Rob Bonta had said he 'fully intends to appeal the ruling to the federal Ninth Circuit'[3]
References 479% CONFIDENCEOverall confidence: 79%How well the pin's source and references back up its dates.Weighted average of how firmly 4 references, the source included, support the pin's start and end times; a reference counts half as much for every 180 days older than the newestShow all pins at 75% confidence or better
The first entry is always the pin's source. Overall confidence is a weighted average of how firmly each reference supports the start and end times used above; a reference counts half as much for every 180 days older than the newest.
- [1]90%sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1831481/000183148126000108/socc-20260819.htmsec.gov· Posted Sep 28, 2026· Starts Aug 20, 2026 ✓· 27% of score
Sable's 8-K of 24 August 2026: 'On August 20, 2026, the State of California filed notice of appeal of the Court's order denying the motion for preliminary injunction and stay'; Bloomberg Tax[4] reports 'a notice filed Thursday'.
- [2]72%California Pipeline Ruling Signals Expansive Defense Production Act Preemption Powervelaw.com· Added Sep 28, 2026· 27% of score
Vinson & Elkins analysis: 'California has appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit'; the ruling held the DPA generally preempts state laws that would prevent compliance with a DPA order, and notes the DPA's sunset provision.[1]
- [3]74%Trump White House Trumps State of California in Fight over Sable Offshoreindependent.com· Published Aug 24, 2026· 23% of score
Santa Barbara Independent on the ruling under appeal: Attorney General Bonta 'fully intends to appeal the ruling to the federal Ninth Circuit'; Wilson fined Sable $1.45 million for violating the consent decree.
- [4]80%California to Appeal Ruling on Sable Pipeline Emergency Ordernews.bloombergtax.com· Published Aug 21, 2026· Starts Aug 20, 2026· 23% of score
Bloomberg Tax: California is seeking the Ninth Circuit's review of the denial of its bid to block the Energy Department's Defense Production Act order, 'according to a notice filed Thursday'; Judge Stephen V. Wilson said on 19 August the DPA order preempted state environmental regulations.
Suggest a correction
Something missing or wrong? Say it in your own words: a link that backs this pin up, a different start or end date and why, or a fact it lacks or gets wrong. The AI checks it against this pin's sources, searches for better ones, and adds any page that backs you up. The pin's own sources still count most. A picture that shows something else, or shows it badly, is looked at too, and moved down or replaced.
