Connect with us

North Dakota

Court case in North Dakota calls federal environmental review regime into question

Published

on

Court case in North Dakota calls federal environmental review regime into question


BISMARCK — A lawsuit before a North Dakota federal district court could upend nearly five decades of environmental regulations affecting infrastructure projects.

The Council on Environmental Quality was created through an executive order by President Richard Nixon in 1969. It implements the National Environmental Policy Act, which directs federal agencies to assess how projects under their jurisdiction will impact environmental factors like air and water quality.

A coalition of 21 Republican-led states, including North Dakota, seeks to overturn a new regulation adopted by the council that took effect in July. The states argue that the rule introduces unreasonable requirements that will slow or even sink important infrastructure including new highways, airports, bridges and water systems, and unlawfully over-emphasizes climate change and environmental justice in the environmental review process.

In a lawsuit filed in May, the states asked the court to strike down the rule, direct the council to adopt regulations consistent with federal law, and reinstate a weaker version the agency enacted during President Donald Trump’s administration in 2020.

Advertisement

A group of 13 other states, plus the District of Columbia, New York City and a handful of advocacy groups, have joined the case on the side of the Council on Environmental Quality. The defendants argue the agency’s work is vital to protect the environment and public health, and that the 2024 rule should be left in place.

It’s possible that neither side will get what it wants. In a hearing earlier this month, U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Traynor said the Council on Environmental Quality’s entire regulatory regime may be unlawful.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit found in a

November order

that the agency does not have rulemaking authority because Congress never explicitly granted it the power to implement the National Environmental Policy Act. The appellate court did not strike down any of the council’s regulations, leaving it up to other courts to decide whether the rules should stand.

Advertisement

Traynor questioned how he could leave the regulations intact given the D.C. court’s findings. He said if he were to apply the court’s reasoning to the North Dakota case, he may conclude that all National Environmental Policy Act regulations passed by the council are void. The council issued its first rule implementing the act in 1978.

“If they have no authority, they have no authority,” Traynor said of the council. “It is a paper tiger.”

An attorney representing the Council on Environmental Quality, Gregory Cumming, rebuffed during the hearing the notion that the agency is operating without approval from Congress. The council keeps Congress apprised of its work with annual reports, he noted. If the assembly did not want the agency to pass rules, it could have passed legislation clarifying that stance, Cumming said.

Jan Hasselman — an attorney representing several advocacy groups that joined the case as defendants — said there’s a reason the council’s rulemaking authority has gone unquestioned for almost five decades.

“Nobody benefits when there’s no rules,” he told the judge. “It’s just sort of a mutually assured destruction.”

Advertisement

Traynor voiced skepticism that such a decision would create disarray. Even if the council’s rules disappear, other local and federal regulations would still be intact, he reasoned.

“It’s not like it becomes the Wild West,” he said.

Traynor asked the plaintiffs and defense to prepare legal briefs explaining how they would be impacted if he adopts the D.C. court’s reasoning.

The discussion came as part of a hearing on motions for summary judgment by the plaintiffs and defense. Both sides asked Traynor to decide the case in their favor without going to trial.

James Auslander, an attorney representing the plaintiff states, said the council is unlawfully and arbitrarily infringing on state sovereignty and the new rule will cause them significant economic harm.

Advertisement

“These are critical projects for plaintiff states and our citizens,” he said.

Cumming argued the plaintiff states have not demonstrated that the new rule has actually harmed them, and that many of the components of the rule challenged as cumbersome are guidelines, not requirements.

Traynor took the motions under advisement and has yet to issue a ruling.

The 21 plaintiffs states are Iowa, North Dakota, South Dakota, Kentucky, Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, South Carolina, Kansas, Virginia, West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Texas and Alaska.

The 13 states that joined the defense as intervenors are California, Oregon, Washington, Massachusetts, Colorado, Michigan, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York and Wisconsin.

Advertisement

This story was originally published on NorthDakotaMonitor.com

______________________________________________________

This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here.





Source link

Advertisement

North Dakota

Finley, North Dakota without water after watermain leak.

Published

on

Finley, North Dakota without water after watermain leak.


A do not use water advisory issued by the City of Finley, North Dakota. April 2026.

FINLEY, N.D. (KFGO) – The city of Finley, North Dakota has been without potable water since Friday due to a suspected water main leak. Steele County Emergency Management says it is unclear how long it will take to restore water services in the city.

The North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality says the available water in Finley has been deemed unusable for drinking, cooking, bathing and washing dishes or laundry.

Advertisement

The water system will need to be flushed and samples that say the water is safe will need to be collected for the water advisory to be lifted.



Source link

Continue Reading

North Dakota

Richard D. Langowski Obituary April 16, 2026 – Tollefson Funeral Home

Published

on

Richard D. Langowski Obituary April 16, 2026 – Tollefson Funeral Home


Richard D. “Rick” Langowski, age 78 of Minto, North Dakota passed away on Thursday, April 16, 2026 at his home in Minto.

Rick was born March 10, 1948 in Grafton, North Dakota, the son of the late Julian and Catherine (Wysocki) Langowski. In 1967, he volunteered for the military bringing him to Germany as a Motor Sargent. After an Honorable Discharge he took a job at the International Airport in Grand Forks, ND. His duties included: refueling planes and jets as well as maintaining the grounds. He had the opportunity to meet the famous singer Mr. James Brown.

Rick was united in marriage to Alice Odegard on June 17, 1982 in Minto, North Dakota. The family made their home in Minto where they raised Jason and Angela. Rick was very proud of his children and loved them more than anything. He told everyone and bragged about the children he raised. He cherished his grandchildren and loved to be present in every aspect of their lives.

His career changed to semi driving where he drove for Cenex Transportation for four years and ten years for Valley Transports. His love for the open road directed him into the used car business. He opened Minto Auto Sales and Services in 1987, proudly operating for 39 years. He had the privilege to meet many people and travel to many places. He enjoyed riding his many Harley Davidson Motorcycles. In 2025, he sold the business to his longtime mechanic and friend, Aaron Anderson. In Rick’s opinion, “Minto Auto is one of the best mechanical shops in the area.”

Advertisement

He was a member of the Sacred Heart Catholic Church, Minto, ND. He loved hunting with Jason, watching sports, especially the Yankees and Twins. In 2017, Rick was able to enjoy a father/son trip of a lifetime to Alaska. He thoroughly enjoyed every aspect of the trip and thought was the best time of his life.

Rick is survived by his children: Jason Odegard, Reynolds, ND; Angela (Nick) Eppert, Goshen, IN; grandchildren: Ashlyn, Kaia, Annika, Boden and Caelan; sisters: Carol King, Grand Forks, ND; Connie Jones, Argyle, MN; seven nieces and nephews. He is also survived by his very close friend and confidant, Yvette Estep, Grafton, ND. He was preceded in death by his parents and siblings: Robert and Ronald.

Rick’s family would like to extend a very special thank you to Yvette Estep, an employee of Rick’s, affectionately known as “hotrod.” She was there for Rick, along with Aaron for doctor’s appointments, treatments and helped comfort him throughout his battle. Jason and Angela will be forever indebted to her and consider her family.

Mass of Christian Burial will be Wednesday, April 22, 2026 at 10:30 A.M. at the Sacred Heart Catholic Church of Minto. Visitation will be for one hour prior to the service at the church. Interment will be at the Sacred Heart Catholic Cemetery, Minto, ND. Military Rites will be provided by the Minto American Legion Post and the North Dakota National Guard Honor Guard.

Advertisement

or send flowers to the family in memory of Richard D. Langowski, please visit our

.



Source link

Continue Reading

North Dakota

Tesla Sues North Dakota Over Direct Sales Ban

Published

on

Tesla Sues North Dakota Over Direct Sales Ban


By Nehal Malik

Tesla is heading to court to challenge one of the final frontiers of the traditional car dealership model. The automaker has officially filed a lawsuit against the state of North Dakota, seeking the right to open its first two showrooms and service centers in Bismarck and Fargo.

Advertisement

For years, North Dakota law has required vehicle manufacturers to sell their products through independent, third-party franchised dealerships. Tesla, which famously avoids the middleman to sell directly to consumers, argues that these decades-old rules are an unnecessary barrier. According to a report by the Minot Daily News, the case is now in the hands of District Judge Bonnie Storbakken.

A Battle Over Definitions

The core of Tesla’s legal argument relies on a specific reading of state law. Currently, North Dakota defines a “manufacturer” as a person who assembles or imports a vehicle and sells it to dealers in the state for resale. Tesla argues that because it sells directly to its customers and does not use third-party dealers at all, it technically doesn’t fall under that legal definition.

“Tesla just wants to be able to sell its vehicles in North Dakota, and not force customers who would wish to purchase a Tesla vehicle to have to drive to Minnesota or another state to do it,” said Ari Holtzblatt, one of Tesla’s attorneys. Currently, the more than 800 Tesla owners in North Dakota have to leave the state just to take delivery of their cars or receive first-party service.

The state’s Assistant Attorney General, Michael Pitcher, isn’t buying it. He argued during a recent hearing that “Tesla can operate in North Dakota the same way that every other manufacturer does. They can appoint dealers, they can enter into franchise agreements, and they can sell through that.” From the state’s perspective, the law isn’t stopping Tesla from doing business; it’s just regulating how the company’s cars get into owners’ hands.

Challenging the Franchise Model

Tesla has a long history of fighting these “protectionist” franchise laws across the U.S. In many cases, Tesla’s legal victories have paved the way for other EV startups like Rivian and Lucid to secure their own direct-sales exceptions. In some of the more restrictive states, Tesla has even found innovative workarounds by partnering with Native American tribes to open stores on sovereign tribal land.

Advertisement

The direct-to-consumer model is vital for Tesla because it allows the company to control the entire customer experience and maintain higher margins by cutting out dealer markups. For the customer, this often translates to a more transparent buying process without the high-pressure sales tactics or hidden fees associated with traditional dealerships.

The Road Ahead for North Dakota

North Dakota has historically lagged behind in EV infrastructure, though the state is slowly catching up with a growing number of Supercharger locations and charging ports along the I-94 corridor. Tesla’s attempt to establish a physical presence in the state is a clear sign that the company sees untapped potential in the region.

If the court rules in Tesla’s favor, it won’t mean instant licenses, but it will give the company the green light to reapply with the Department of Transportation. As the automotive world shifts toward an electric future, these legal battles in North Dakota will likely determine how much choice consumers actually have when it comes to how they buy their next car.

By Nehal Malik

Tesla is gearing up for its first major financial check-in of the year. The company has officially scheduled its Q1 2026 earnings call for after the bell on Wednesday, April 22, 2026. Ahead of the event, Tesla has shared its company-compiled earnings consensus for the quarter, which aggregates estimates from 20 top sell-side analysts, including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Wedbush.

According to the data, analysts are expecting average total revenues of approximately $21.4 billion for the quarter. On the profitability side, the consensus for GAAP Earnings Per Share (EPS) sits at $0.16, with an adjusted non-GAAP figure of $0.33. While the company noted it “does not endorse any information, recommendations or conclusions made by the analysts,” these numbers provide a clear benchmark for what Wall Street expects from Elon Musk and his team.

Advertisement

Setting the Stage for Q1 Results

This earnings report follows a quarter in which Tesla’s delivery numbers came in slightly below analyst projections. The company delivered 358,023 vehicles, just missing the initial analyst consensus of 365,645. Even with the slight miss, deliveries grew about 6.3% compared to the first quarter of last year.

To put these new earnings estimates in perspective, we can look back at Q1 2025. In that first quarter of last year, Tesla reported an adjusted EPS of $0.27 and revenue of $19.34 billion. While the Q1 estimates show a healthy gain in earnings that aligns with the year-over-year growth in deliveries, the focus during the call will likely be on margins and future growth rather than just the raw revenue numbers.

A Roadmap Beyond the Model S and X

The Q&A session with executives is expected to be one of the most eventful in years, especially since Model S and Model X production has officially ended. Tesla is currently offering its final Signature Edition units as a tribute to its flagship legacy, leaving a “premium-shaped” hole in the lineup that many investors hope will be filled by a new high-end SUV (CyberSUV, anyone?) or the long-awaited next-gen Roadster.

We also expect significant updates on Tesla’s AI and robotics divisions. Musk recently confirmed that the AI5 chip design is complete, with work already beginning on AI6 and Dojo 3. Additionally, the Cybercab robotaxi is slated to enter mass production this month, and investors will be looking for a firm timeline on the first unsupervised autonomous rides.

What to Watch For

Beyond the balance sheet, the call will likely touch on the Optimus humanoid robot. Tesla is rumored to be close to unveiling a production-ready prototype later this year, and any mention of “Optimus in the factory” will surely move the needle.

Advertisement

As Tesla transitions from a traditional car manufacturer to an AI and robotics powerhouse, this earnings call will serve as a pulse check for that transformation. We’ll be covering the call on April 22 to see if Tesla can beat expectations and provide a clear vision for its hardware-heavy roadmap through 2027.

By Nehal Malik

Tesla’s Spring 2026 Software Update (version 2026.14 and later) is officially here, and while the “flashy” features like the new “Hey Grok” wake word are getting most of the attention, the vehicle’s user interface is also getting a massive glow-up. Tesla has updated the parked vehicle visualizations, bringing improved vehicle models to the center touchscreen.

Installed on 0.9% of fleet

Advertisement

Last updated: Apr 18, 2:05 pm UTC

The new look was first showcased by Tesla enthusiast @sergiumogan on X, who posted a direct comparison between the old and new interfaces. The difference is immediately apparent, with improved lighting and the car model and the surrounding scene looking significantly more realistic.

Higher Fidelity via Unreal Engine

The jump in quality is thanks to Tesla’s integration of Unreal Engine into its software stack. This technology was previously used on the flagship Model S and Model X, but it is now trickling down to the rest of the fleet. The car model itself is higher quality, with improved lighting effects that make reflections on the paint and glass far more noticeable.

Advertisement

The environment around the car has also been completely redesigned. Instead of a simple gray void, the “park scene” now features a professional, studio-like atmosphere. There is a cool fog-like effect over the windscreen, with spotlight-style lighting shining down on the car, creating a sense of depth that was missing in previous versions. This level of polish makes the car feel like a premium piece of tech even when it is just sitting in your garage.

Hardware Requirements and Compatibility

Currently, this high-fidelity visualization is only showing up for the new “Highland” Model 3 (2024+) and the 2025+ Model Y (Juniper). However, there are plenty of reasons for owners of older vehicles to be optimistic. This feature will likely become available for some other models in a future update, such as the Cybertruck, roughly 2022+ Model 3, and 2022+ Model Y, provided they are equipped with the AMD Ryzen-powered MCU 3 infotainment unit.

The processing power required for these lighting effects and high-res textures means that older Intel Atom-based cars (MCU 2) will likely be left out of this specific visual upgrade. While this might not be the most “exciting” functional feature, it proves that Tesla is working on all aspects of the user experience. The company isn’t just pushing its self-driving software to the limits; it is making sure the car looks and feels modern every time you step inside.

It’s not just the parked screen; these improved models are also used on the vehicle visualizations.

A Strong Start to the Spring Update

The Spring 2026 Software Update has delivered on its promises in spades. Between interactive maps for the rear screen and the rebranding of Dog Mode to Pet Mode, not to mention a brand new Self-Driving App that brings subscriptions, tutorials, and usage stats under one umbrella, Tesla is keeping its fleet feeling fresh.

As the Spring Update continues to roll out to more owners globally, we expect to see even more hidden UI tweaks discovered. Tesla has successfully turned its cars into evolving platforms where a simple over-the-air update can make your three-year-old vehicle feel like a brand-new model.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending