SANTA BARBARA COUNTY, Calif. (KEYT) – Sable Offshore has reportedly asked the U.S. Department of Energy to use eminent domain to seize multiple properties in Santa Barbara County crossed by pipelines associated with local oil production infrastructure.
On March 13 of this year, the Trump Administration announced that it had forced Sable Offshore, a Houston-based energy company, to restart oil production, including the use of onshore pipelines shuttered since a massive oil spill from a ruptured pipeline in 2015.
Notably, the Trump Administration's order to restart did not explicitly direct crude oil from the Santa Ynez Unit for exclusive military use nor limit its destination to the nation's strategic petroleum reserve at the time and even if it had, those national security claims do not hold up to scrutiny.
The shut down in 2015 included both offshore and onshore oil-producing infrastructure collectively known as the Santa Ynez Unit.
The potential restart of the shuttered pipelines and the entire Santa Ynez Unit was subject to a federal court order agreed to by its former operator Plains All-American that required any operator to work with California state regulators to restart production.
Initially, the private energy company was complying with the federal court order.
In September of last year, Sable Offshore submitted a Request for Approval of Restart Plans, which involved the onshore pipelines, to the California Office of State Fire Marshal as detailed in the consent decree.
The state safety regulator found that there were still outstanding steps required before approving a restart the following month.
Instead of conducting the requested safety actions, Sable Offshore instead informed investors in December of last year that it had determined that pipelines connecting offshore platforms to the onshore oil processing plant on the Gaviota Coast and then on to Pentland Station in Kern County are technically interstate pipelines under the Pipeline Safety Act and requested that federal regulators take over its restart plans.
The Department of Transportation agreed with Sable Offshore's assessment and promptly asserted its authority over restart plans in mid-December.
Yesterday, Politico reported that legal representatives of Sable Offshore requested that the Trump Administration step in to take over the disputed areas, including parts of Gaviota State Park, through eminent domain.
"Given the current policies and actions of the State of California aimed at preventing the flow of oil from the [Santa Ynez Unit], the DOE [U.S. Department of Energy] should consider exercising eminent domain rights over a ~3 mile section of the [Santa Ynez Pipeline System] through state waters and a ~4 mile section of the SYPS that traverses Gaviota State Park," Politico reported a June 2, 2026, letter from legal representatives of Sable Offshore stated.
According to Politico, Sable Offshore asked the U.S. Department of Energy to take over property at three locations in Santa Barbara County:
A three-mile stretch of state-owned submerged land off the coast of Santa Barbara County A section of Gaviota State Park that includes about four miles of buried oil pipelines A privately owned reserve north of BuelltonLocation #1
The first area requested for federal takeover is where offshore pipelines come into shore and is currently owned by the State Lands Commission shared the Center for Biological Diversity.
"Seizing a big chunk of one of California's most beautiful parks to boost a private oil company would be an unlawful and utterly outrageous abuse of federal power," argued Talia Nimmer, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Trump officials should think twice before granting this shameless request. California's coast took a massive hit from this pipeline system's last leak, and we'll fight to protect our ocean from another massive oil spill."
The same state agency noted that an announcement from Sable Offshore about restarting oil production in May and a lack of advanced notice about the public statements violated the terms of the agency's leases held by Sable Offshore regarding the Santa Ynez Unit.
"The [May 19] press release appears to mischaracterize the nature of recent activities, causing significant public confusion and raising questions regarding Sable's intentions," read the State Lands Commission's letter issued days after the announcement of a restart. "[State Lands] Commission staff has informed me [Lt. Governor of California and Chair of the California State Lands Commission Eleni Kounalakis] that the limited volume oil flows are the result of well-testing procedures required by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement prior to restart. These activities do not constitute a resumption of commercial production or a full restart of the SYU [Santa Ynez Unit]. Characterizing testing activities as a restart of operations is not only misleading but also highly inappropriate – particularly given that Sable has not obtained the necessary regulatory approvals to fully resume operations at SYU."
Those claims also resulted in an investor rights law firm to file one of multiple class action lawsuits on behalf of purchasers of Sable Offshore securities in July of 2025 and triggered an ongoing investigation by federal regulators and prosecutors the energy company later revealed to investors.
Your News Channel reached out to the state agency for more information and its response will be added to this article when it is received.
Location #2
The second area involved pipelines subject to ongoing litigation.
The day after the executive order directing a restart in March, the California Department of Parks and Recreation officially declined Sable Offshore's easement request regarding a four-mile pipeline segment in Gaviota State Park before demanding the immediate removal of pipelines from the state agency's jurisdiction.
"Section 8 of the temporary pipeline easement granted to Sable’s predecessor, Celeron Pipeline Company, which expired in 2016 ("Expired Easement"), attached hereto, authorizes State Parks to demand Sable to remove the pipeline and restore the property to its original condition after the end of the term," stated the California Department of Parks and Recreation in a letter to Sable Offshore on March 14, 2026. "This letter demands immediate removal of the pipeline on State Parks’ property pursuant to section 8 of the Expired Easement. State Parks has determined that due to Sable’s excessive drain on state resources and incompatibility of their project with the park unit, State Parks will not be granting Sable an easement to continue to use Gaviota State Park for its oil pipeline operations. Additionally, although, State Parks has discussed the possibility of an easement with Sable, all prior permissions and discussions have been premised on the requirement that Sable comply with all applicable state laws and obtain all applicable state approvals, and Sable has now indicated that it has begun or imminently intends to begin restarting operations without adhering to those requirements or obtaining permission to use the State of California's land."
The easement is necessary to resume the use of the section of pipeline in Gaviota State Park and was something noted by Your News Channel back in January.
According to State Parks, Sable was informed of the steps necessary to secure an easement needed to restart the flow of oil through the pipeline subject to its jurisdiction on more than one occasion last year.
"Rather than pursuing an easement as State Parks had recommended, Sable initially pursued an ROE [Right-of-Entry] permit to perform the anomaly digs [last year]," shared the state agency before concluding, "Sable does not currently have any easement rights or other property rights that would allow it to transport oil through Gaviota State Park (or to leave its Pipeline in the Park)."
During pipeline safety checks and repairs conducted last year, multiple pipeline anomalies were detected along the four-mile-long section of pipeline within the borders of Gaviota State Park.
The image below shows the section of pipelines that pass through Gaviota State Park on the lower left-hand side as well as the detected pipeline anomalies needing repair work last year identified as the blue circles along oil pipeline Line 325a, shown as the green line.
Some of that repair work completed last year is also subject to civil charges brought by the California Attorney General and criminal charges brought by the Santa Barbara County District Attorney's Office.
Location #3
The third property has been caught up in litigation since the 2015 Refugio Oil Spill.
In November of 2024, Your News Channel reported that the window for applying to a $70 million settlement with the pipelines former operator had closed, but one plaintiff in particular wasn't ready to settle.
The settlement resolved all class claims by the more than 170 parcels of private property still included in the lawsuit, but one party from the original filing, Zaca Preserve LLC, chose to continue litigation instead of taking the settlement detailed Cappello and Noël LLP back in 2024.
The suggested eminent domain claim is at property managed by Zaca Preserve LLC. and the private organization declined to respond to any of Your News Channel's questions when reached for comment Tuesday.
Statewide Responses
California Attorney General Bonta has filed multiple lawsuits in federal court, arguing that orders issued by federal regulators about restarting oil pipelines including taking over exclusive regulatory authority of restart plans on Dec. 17, issuing an approval of restart plans on Dec. 22, and granting an Emergency Special Permit to restart pipelines on Dec. 24, were all unlawful.
"The Wright Order is an affront to, and usurpation of, the traditional police powers delegated to the states, in that it seeks to override any and all California laws that stand in the way of the restart of the Pipelines," stated the latest lawsuit challenging the forced restart filed by the state's Attorney General. "The Wright Order also does not allege that Sable is part of a national energy program or a national defense program...The Wright Order also fails to provide any rational basis that connects how ordering Sable to 'require acceptance and prioritize performance' [a quote from the Defense Production Act] of 'contracts' or 'allocations' would promote the national defense with respect to energy. The Secretary fails to rationally explain why the Wright Order only favors Sable, nor does it provide any credible information to support the restart of Sable’s pipeline in a manner that is 'immediate' and circumvents state and federal law, as well as existing court orders."
Indeed, broad statements about a domestic energy crisis do not match the same Administration's recent actions including cutting billions in energy investments, potentially outside of its legal authority, rescinding over 3.5 million acres of offshore waters leased for energy generation and cutting deals to terminate offshore wind leases for projects on both coasts, and even spending almost a billion dollars to halt plans to build offshore wind farms, an action that is now subject to a Congressional inquiry and multiple Freedom of Information Act requests by Your News Channel author.
"The pipeline operator [Sable Offshore] then relied on the [U.S. Secretary of Energy] Wright Order, and a contemporaneous opinion from the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of Legal Counsel, to argue that any state laws or existing court orders standing in the way of restart could be ignored and set aside," detailed the Attorney General's lawsuit. "The very next day, on March 14, 2026, the pipeline operator restarted pumping oil through pipelines despite an outstanding preliminary injunction in state court, despite not having necessary permits from either the state or the federal government for pipeline operation, despite still not having approval from several state agencies, and despite not having a current or valid easement to keep or utilize the segment of its pipeline crossing California state property."
"California being the poster child for having a self-inflicted energy emergency," argued Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum in early June. "We're for a solution that gets more affordability, protects the environment and helps national security. If people are opposed to this then they would be on the side of higher prices for Californians and less national security, and more dependence on foreign oil."
Congressional Inquiries
In addition to the state's legal claims in federal court, a May 2026 bicameral Congressional inquiry specifically detailed allegations of financial ties between Sable Offshore and President Trump's campaigns.
"Sable is also currently under investigation by the SEC for allegations of advance information being shared selectively among company insiders in October 2025, right before Sable raised $250 million by selling shares of its common stocks to private investors to help keep the company afloat," a letter from members of California's Congressional delegation noted in May. "The Trump administration has clearly been working hand in glove with Sable to try to force the restart of SYU. For example, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement made misleading statements about SYU oil production in July 2025 that paralleled statements made by Sable, the same statements that resulted in securities class action lawsuits by your [Sable's] shareholders."
"Executives at Sable have directly contributed to President Trump's campaigns...contributed over $300,000 to Super PACs like Right to Rise USA and Senate Leadership Fund which made contributions to President Trump’s 2016 and 2024 campaigns. Additionally, Gregory Patrinely, Executive Vice President and CFO of Sable, contributed thousands of dollars to Trump-aligned committees in 2020 and 2024," detailed the California delegation's letter to Sable Offshore's CEO back in May. "During his campaign, President Trump promised to reverse environmental rules for your industry in exchange for $1 billion in donations. It is difficult to avoid the inference that actions like the use of DPA [Defense Production Act] to overcome state laws on behalf of an oil producer represents a fulfillment of that 'pay to play' promise."
Last month, Trump Administration officials joined Sable Offshore's leadership in Santa Barbara County to survey the restarted Santa Ynez Unit.
(Left to right) Energy Secretary Chris Wright, Sable Offshore CEO Jim Flores, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum(Photo Credit: Beth Farnsworth/KEYT)"We're the largest global exporter of oil last month in the U-S. The U-S, number one. Russia, number two. Saudi Arabia, number three," said Secretary of Energy Wright during the June visit to Santa Barbara County. "But yet we're standing here in a state, our largest state, our most military intensive state and two-thirds of the oil is imported from distant places overseas. Unacceptable."
During the visit, officials confirmed that the Trump Administration and Sable Offshore were in an "active dialogue" about creating a new West Coast Petroleum Reserve.
Senators Padilla and Murray noted in a letter to Secretary of Energy Wright later the same month, "On June 2, 2026, oil producer Sable Offshore Corp.,... sent a proposal to the Department of Energy which calls for the establishment of a West Coast Petroleum Reserve in California. Sable proposed the new petroleum reserve 'in response to the inquiries made by the Trump Administration'."
The Senators noted that those plans require Congressional approval under federal law.
"The Fiscal Year 2026 Energy and Water Appropriations bill's accompanying report, as a condition of funding the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, explicitly prohibits the establishment of 'any new regional petroleum product reserves unless funding for such a proposed regional petroleum product reserve is explicitly requested in advance in an annual budget request and approved by Congress in an appropriations act'."
According to the Department of Energy, there are currently no strategic oil preserve sites outside of Texas and Louisiana and questions about the locations and size of the proposed regional strategic reserve remain unanswered despite multiple inquiries with Sable Offshore and the Trump Administration.
According to statements shared with Politico, the designation of the Santa Ynez Unit as a strategic petroleum reserve system would allow the Trump Administration to unilaterally undermine each of the state and private property claims.
Federal law does allow for the use of eminent domain for pipelines required to supply a strategic petroleum reserve, but as detailed above, under current federal law, a request to create a new reserve would require notifying Congress and inclusion in the federal government's annual budget process.
Your News Channel reached out to the Department of Energy and Sable Offshore regarding the creation of a new strategic reserve and the request for the use of eminent domain and their respective responses will be added to this article when they are received.
Trump Administration Asked to Seize State and Private Property to Support Local Oil Production News Channel 3-12.
Hence then, the article about trump administration asked to seize state and private property to support local oil production was published today ( ) and is available on News channel ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Trump Administration Asked to Seize State and Private Property to Support Local Oil Production )
Also on site :
- Astros Option Mike Burrows
- 6,000-year-old broken ribs discovered in Syria may be one of the oldest known cases of child abuse in the world
- This Massive Hisense U7 QLED TV Is 43% Off, Its Lowest Price Ever