Amoco Production Co. v. Village of Gambell

1987-03-24

Headline: Court limits Alaska subsistence law by ruling it does not cover offshore federal waters, allowing oil and gas leasing and exploration on the Outer Continental Shelf to proceed without prior subsistence review.

Holding: The Court reversed the Ninth Circuit, holding ANILCA’s subsistence-review requirement does not apply to the Outer Continental Shelf and that judges may weigh competing harms before blocking offshore exploration.

Real World Impact:

Permits offshore exploration to continue without ANILCA subsistence pre-approval.
Clarifies ANILCA protections apply to lands within Alaska’s political boundaries.
Affirms courts’ power to balance harms before issuing environmental injunctions.

Topics: offshore oil leasing, Alaska Native subsistence, environmental injunctions, Outer Continental Shelf

Summary

Background

The dispute arose after the Secretary of the Interior approved oil and gas leases in the Bering Sea (Norton Sound Lease Sale 57 and Navarin Basin Lease Sale 83). Two Alaska Native villages, Gambell and Stebbins, said the sales threatened their aboriginal hunting and fishing and argued the Secretary failed to follow ANILCA’s subsistence-review rules before leasing. The District Court refused to stop exploration, finding the leases and exploration would not significantly restrict subsistence uses; the Ninth Circuit disagreed and ordered an injunction.

Reasoning

The Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit. It held that the phrase “in Alaska” in ANILCA should be read in its plain, political sense — meaning lands within the State of Alaska’s boundaries — and that the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) lies beyond those boundaries. The Court also emphasized that judges must keep their usual power to balance harms before issuing injunctions and that the Ninth Circuit’s rule presuming irreparable environmental harm was inconsistent with traditional equitable discretion. The Court relied on the statutes’ text, definitions, and contextual indicators rather than treating floor debate remarks as dispositive.

Real world impact

The ruling means ANILCA’s subsistence-review procedures do not automatically block offshore leasing and exploration on the OCS, so oil and gas activity can proceed subject to OCS law and environmental review already in place. The Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s earlier holding that a different statute (ANCSA §4(b)) had extinguished aboriginal rights on the OCS and sent that question back to the Court of Appeals for further consideration.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice Stevens, joined by Justice Scalia, agreed with the judgment and Parts I and III of the opinion but did not join the Court on the injunctive-relief discussion, noting that the holding on ANILCA made that question unnecessary.