posted on Jun, 21 2011 @ 01:54 PM
The conclusion that somehow BP and Transocean are somehow off the hook due to this ruling is absurd. If you read the
, you will see it is very much limited in scope.
To summarize, a group of plaintiffs sought an injunction against BP and Transocean that would prevent them from engaging in any future actions that
that may be in violation of ecological and environmental laws. The problem is, as the judge points out, this injunction stems from the Deepwater
Horizon incident, and is limited in scope to that well. That well is already closed up, so any injunction granted to the plaintiffs is moot.
This case had nothing to do with monetary damages or cleanup. As the judge points out, even if it did have something to do with the current cleanup
process, neither BP or Transocean are in charge of that effort. The various government entities are in charge of the cleanup, and so any order the
judge granted against BP or transocean would be pointless.
Though the federal government is in charge of the cleanup efforts, that does not mean BP and Transocean are not responsible for the costs incurred by
the federal government. That will be decided by future lawsuits, brought by the involved parties.
So really this is no big deal, as the plaintiffs in this suit were asking the court to order something that would have zero impact on the current
situation in the Gulf,
edit on 21-6-2011 by nataylor because: (no reason given)