A federal judge in Washington state has recently made a ruling against BNSF Railway, a company based in Fort Worth. The judge ordered BNSF to pay a hefty sum of $395 million for trespassing on tribal lands located north of Seattle. This decision came after the Swinomish tribe filed a lawsuit against BNSF, claiming that the company had violated an easement agreement dating back to 1991. The agreement stated that oil trains were limited to 25 cars per day, but the tribe alleged that BNSF often exceeded this limit by running trains with 100 cars.
The lawsuit accused BNSF of intentionally trespassing on tribal land, which led to the legal battle that culminated in this significant financial penalty. Despite these allegations, BNSF declined to provide any comment on the matter in an email to the Star-Telegram. However, U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik had previously ruled that BNSF had deliberately trespassed on Swinomish land, and his recent ruling determined that BNSF had made substantial profits from this trespassing.
Specifically, Judge Lasnik found that BNSF had earned $362 million in net profits and an additional $32 million in post-tax profits as a result of using the tribal land without authorization. BNSF had been transporting bakken oil across the reservation in order to send the crude to a nearby refinery. This transportation route passed through sensitive coastal ecosystems where the Swinomish tribe holds treaty rights to fish, further complicating the legal dispute.
The situation was exacerbated last year when two BNSF engines derailed on Swinomish land, resulting in a leak of approximately 3,100 gallons of oil. This incident likely added to the tribe’s grievances against BNSF and contributed to the escalating legal battle. In response to the ruling, the Swinomish tribe issued a statement expressing their perspective on the matter.
They emphasized that the substantial monetary penalty reflected the unjust profits that BNSF had gained by repeatedly using the tribe’s land against their objections. The statement conveyed the tribe’s firm stance on protecting their land and resources from unauthorized use, highlighting the importance of upholding the agreements and rights that have been established over the years.
Overall, this legal case serves as a reminder of the complex issues surrounding land rights, environmental protection, and corporate responsibility. It underscores the significance of honoring agreements and respecting the rights of indigenous communities in the face of economic interests. The outcome of this case sets a precedent for holding companies accountable for trespassing and unauthorized land use, signaling the importance of upholding legal and ethical standards in such matters.
