Gov. Mark Gordon (Angus M. Thuermer Jr./WyoFile)

Governor Mark Gordon asked Attorney General Bridget Hill to research how Wyoming could sue Washington over that state’s decision to deny a coal port permit over environmental concerns, the governor said last week.

“We are considering whether what’s called an original act or original lawsuit is advisable,” Gordon told WyoFile in an interview Friday.

Gordon described legal action that could result in a clash “state to state in front of the [U.S.] Supreme Court,” but said for now that he’d asked Hill to draw up a legal strategy. Wyoming could join with other states to sue Washington for violating a prohibition in the U.S. Constitution against a state regulating another states’ trade, Gordon said.  

“I’ve asked the attorney general to provide me with a strategy on that matter both from the point of view of if Wyoming were to go alone or preferably if Wyoming would, with other states, do such an action,” Gordon said.  

Hill declined to comment on the matter, saying that any such strategy research would be bound by attorney-client privilege.

To date, Wyoming has limited its legal action against the Pacific-coast state to supportive legal briefs in a lawsuit brought by coal and railroad interests. That lawsuit hit a snag recently after a federal judge stayed the federal case until state-level court cases over the proposed port are resolved.  

The stay, Gordon said, “is just another long delay in the process.”

In Sept. 2017, the Washington Department of Ecology denied permit applications to build the Millennium Bulk Terminal in Longview, Washington. The regulators cited threats from coal shipments to air and water quality and tribal natural resource rights, among other concerns. Millennium Bulk is owned by Lighthouse Resources, which also owns coal mines in Wyoming.

Support state government reporting by becoming a member today.

Gordon believes Washington regulators improperly used their authority to block coal exports because of popular and political animus against the carbon-heavy fuel in that state.

“They’re using the Clean Water Act and their Department of Ecology to block export of coal and they’re doing it unabashedly,” Gordon said. “They’re using these environmental regulations ill-advisedly for things that are not appropriate for the regulation.”

Gordon argued he supported a state’s right to regulate its own water, but that Washington had overstepped its bounds in this case. “States should have every opportunity to use the tools they need to protect their environment,” he said. “In this particular case you’re really running afoul of the interstate commerce clause.” The commerce clause in the U.S. Constitution authorizes the federal government — not states — to regulate interstate commerce.

In March, Gordon vetoed a bill that would have let the Legislature take steps to file its own lawsuit against Washington. In his veto message, Gordon said the bill could confuse a future judge about what the state’s intentions were if two separate branches of government were pursuing litigation, and he questioned the Legislature’s authority to pursue a lawsuit.

In the March 15 letter, Gordon suggested he would sue if need be. “I will be tireless in exercising every legal option to assert Wyoming’s access to markets worldwide,” he wrote. The Legislature adjourned before Gordon’s veto and did not attempt to override him.

Gordon has spoken with legislative leaders about his efforts with the AG, he said, and has their support. “One of the reasons I did the veto is I said that will be working in lockstep on this,” he said.

Gray was pleased the AG would pursue a legal strategy but still believes it’s “unfortunate” that Gordon vetoed his bill, Gray wrote in an emailed statement on Monday afternoon.

“With the stay in the Lighthouse case for procedural weaknesses that a state to state lawsuit does not have,” Gray wrote, “Wyoming needs to have options to pursue a state to state lawsuit.  The Attorney General has this ability so it is good that they are pursuing that. But the legislature should have that ability as well.”

Andrew Graham is reporting for WyoFile from Laramie. He covers state government, energy and the economy. Reach him at 443-848-8756 or at, follow him @AndrewGraham88

Join the Conversation


Want to join the discussion? Fantastic, here are the ground rules: * Provide your full name — no pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish and expects commenters to do the same. * No personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats. Keep it clean, civil and on topic. *WyoFile does not fact check every comment but, when noticed, submissions containing clear misinformation, demonstrably false statements of fact or links to sites trafficking in such will not be posted. *Individual commenters are limited to three comments per story, including replies.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. LOL. To think that all this time, I thought republicans were big on states’ rights. I hope that Washington prevails over Wyoming’s proposed invasion. Y’all sure picked another real doozy of a governor.

  2. Gov Gordon is a Big mistake. Cusses at people instead of being polite and can’t accept that change is real, including climate change. Suing WA state isn’t going to change That. Besides, WA had Every right to deny you polluting even more in Their state, not yours Gordon. How about opening your eyes and see the haze for what it really is, Nasty. I’m so disappointed in people who can make excuse while the air gets thicker and Now want to force another state to allow us to pollute more. Had the Gov been out of WY? Does he know pollution doesn’t stop at the state line and we are Dirty!?

  3. Not everyone in this world thinks climate change is not real !! California was on fire, the Midwest is under water freak weather coming to every state, but lets just ignore the problem and burn more coal?
    Im sorry that things change over time, but watching fox news and pretending that their is no problem with the environment is not the answer.
    this problem can be solved but it cant be solved when half the country thinks there is nothing wrong?
    Republicans used to care about the environment. when and why has that changed?