Amid a flurry of executive orders that appear to pump new life into proposed copper-nickel mining projects in northeastern Minnesota, an attorney for mining opponents all but said “not so fast” this week in Ely.
Kathryn Hoffman, an attorney for the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy, spoke to about 100 people at the weekly Tuesday Group luncheon, and pushed back against the administration and recent actions that have appeared to favor mining interests.
Since taking office in January, President Donald Trump has issued numerous executive orders, some centering on energy independence, others on national security and all seemingly set on making things easier for copper-nickel mining projects to proceed.
Hoffman summarized each and charged the administration was “flooding the zone,” with maneuvers designed in part to shift political winds.
She cautioned that some of the actions carry little legal weight.
“There absolutely are things the federal government can do (but) there are limits to which that can reach into Minnesota and affect what happens here,” said Hoffman. “There’s a certain amount of overwhelm by the flood of actions that have taken place.”
Hoffman pointed to executive orders declaring a national energy emergency, which repealed numerous orders put in place by former President Joe Biden and ordered federal agencies to speed up permitting processes.
While aimed at oil and gas development, the orders also extend to mining.
Other orders pertain to national security and call for immediate action to facilitate domestic mineral production, prioritizing mineral development on federal land.
Another pertains to environmental impact statements, which typically take a year or more to complete, and calls for their completion within 28 days in an effort to fast track development of resources critical to the economy and the nation’s military readiness.
“What are the themes?” Hoffman asked. “The first is that the Trump Administration is going heavily into national security. They’re saying this is about having the minerals we need for military readiness and that the overall goal is to streamline things that support the industry.”
She charged the administration is trying to “make people feel overwhelmed and become paralyzed,” by the many actions aimed at fast-tracking new mining.
“They benefit from the lack of clarity around the actual legal impact of these various actions,” said Hoffman. “We’re seeing new levels of executive overreach.”
Hoffman said her role and that of MCEA is to “disentangle” what is meaningful about the orders and determining what is meaningful and what is “bluster and fear.”
She pointed specifically to Minnesota state law pertaining to mining.
“Here in Minnesota we still control our own mineral resources,” said Hoffman. “Whether or not a mine gets permitted is still within the authority of our state government.”
Hoffman pointed specifically to action that designates the NewRange (formerly PolyMet) project on a list of fast-tracked projects.
“The legal effect of this is zero,” she said. “There’s no federal permit that comes out of this. There are no new rights the mine is entitled to. Fast tracking the PolyMet mine in this way doesn’t mean anything. It’s just a name on a website.”
But Hoffman cautioned that federal efforts to speed up permitting could have some impact, subject to litigation.
Minnesota’s Attorney General is part of litigation that looks to block the administration’s declaration of a national energy emergency.
“There are a lot of unknowns between now and then that have not been resolved,” said Hoffman. “What that means is state laws become our safeguard.”
Hoffman also took aim at the move to substantially reduce timelines for permitting.
“A 28-day EIS is a joke,” she said. “An EIS requires studies. It requires multiple rounds of public comment.”
Hoffman also warned that mining companies are capitalizing on current political rhetoric, including the pitch that the projects are needed for national security, simply to advance their efforts.
“That’s the through line,” said Hoffman. “Mining companies want to mine and they will say whatever they think they need to say to move their project forward.”
She contends the companies will use the Trump Administration arguments at the state level, and called for opponents to push back and contact lawmakers.
Hoffman cited the Twin Metals project near Ely, calling it “the football of the last 16 years,” noting the ping-pong involving mineral leases needed to move the initiative forward.
While a bid to reinstate the leases stalled in Congres, Hoffman predicted “Trump will probably give them back” via executive order, and that the next battle will be a legal one.
Hoffman’s remarks come amid the back-and-forth this week battle over new mining projects in northeastern Minnesota.
Copper-nickel mining has never been done in Minnesota, and comes with it a greater risk of water pollution than iron ore mining, which has taken place in the region for more than a century.
New copper-nickel mines, such as the one proposed by Twin Metals as well as the NewRange operation proposed between Babbitt and Hoyt Lakes, have been hailed as the start of a new era of mining on the Iron Range.
The issue has become polarized, with environmental groups working to block new mining and supporters - including most of the region’s elected officials - in support.
Proponents say the new mines are needed to help supply minerals needed to build electric vehicles, solar panels, and other technologies needed to power a carbon-free energy transition.
Those opposed say copper-nickel mining is too risky to beion’s water-rich environment, too susceptible to pollution, and likely to damage property valuess amenity- done in the reg and the region based economy.
Some groups contend the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness would be at risk.
Here are the M days this month 5th - KELO Station Read 10 6th - KELO Station Read 16 9th - KELO Station Read 10 11th KELO Station Read 28
