Meanwhile, Frost is considering the decision of the private security company to issue a permit.
Howard Lerner, a leading attorney for opponents of the power line, said the ruling suggests the court is only interested in narrower issues pertaining to Hübsch and not the line itself.
“The Supreme Court is not going to interfere with his decisions on the merits,” Lerner said.
Noting that both injunctions were granted based in part on the likelihood that opponents would win in court, Trainee accused utilities of causing unnecessary environmental damage by playing with taxpayer money.
“If they can’t get through the national wildlife sanctuary, their entire construction path will have to change, which means they’re wasting a huge amount of money,” Lerner said. “You have an expensive power line going nowhere. This is corporate irresponsibility. “
A utility spokesman dismissed the Supreme Court’s ruling as “procedural” and said they plan to appeal the injunction in an appeals court while teams continue to mow and cut trees along the planned route.
Utilities disagreed with the claim that the plaintiffs were likely to win.
“At this stage, we will not speculate on whether the outcome of any litigation will result in a repetition of parts of the regulatory approval process, let alone any specific route changes or the amount of potential cost increases,” they wrote.
…
