Rep. Panetta Continues Legal Push Challenging Administration’s Efforts to Restart Sable Offshore Pipeline

September 14, 2026 Press Release Washington, D.C. – United States Representative Jimmy Panetta (CA-19) joined Rep. Salud Carbajal (CA-24) and 18 other members of Congress in filing an amicus brief in California v. Wright , pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, in support of California’s challenge to the Trump Administration’s use of the Defense Production Act (DPA) to facilitate the restart of the Sable Offshore oil pipeline system along California’s Central Coast. U.S. Senators Alex Padilla (D-CA), Adam Schiff (D-CA), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) also led the filing. The brief argues that the Administration has failed to identify a legitimate national defense need for Sable’s crude oil and that the DPA order does not satisfy the statutory requirements for invoking this extraordinary authority. Sable produces crude oil, not finished fuels used by the military, and the order does not establish a connection between Sable’s production and an unmet military fuel requirement. “This Administration’s efforts to restart the Sable Offshore pipeline system in Santa Barbara could do damage to our environment and economy,” said Rep. Panetta. “That’s why I joined this amicus brief challenging its use of the Defense Production Act to force this pipeline system back into operation and open our waters back up to offshore oil production. The order fails to establish a legitimate national defense need or genuine emergency that would justify using this extraordinary authority on behalf of a single oil company. We must continue to support each other and stand together from the courtroom to the coastline to protect our environment and economy.” “The Sable pipeline restart is a classic example of the Trump administration abusing power to benefit political allies at the expense of local communities,” said Rep. Carbajal. “As our brief outlines, there was no legitimate national security justification for invoking the Defense Production Act on behalf of Sable. This Administration is clearly fixated on boosting the fossil fuel industry, even when doing so risks putting our environment and public health in harm’s way. The people of Santa Barbara County and California have every right to be concerned about the pipeline restart given its role in the 2015 Refugio oil spill. I will keep fighting alongside my colleagues to hold the Administration accountable for this overreach and protect our communities’ right to a safe environment.” “Californians have been clear: we don’t want oil infrastructure off our coast,” said Sen. Padilla. “The Trump Administration is using a bogus justification to open our waters to their Big Oil donors, jeopardizing our environment and our economy. It’s corrupt, it’s dangerous, and I’ll do everything in my power to stop it.” “The idea that reopening a damaged pipeline on the Central Coast of California is somehow imperative to our national defense – when killing other renewable energy sources is just fine, when data centers are demanding new energy and we’re taking offline 90 to 95% of the new energy coming into the grid – tells you this has nothing to do with national security. It has nothing to do with your price at the pump. It only has to do with the president keeping a promise to the big oil companies, and we are all paying the price,” said Sen. Schiff. Sable Offshore acquired the Santa Ynez Unit from ExxonMobil in 2024. The pipeline had been out of service since the 2015 Refugio oil spill. In March 2026, Energy Secretary Chris Wright invoked the DPA and ordered Sable to restore pipeline operations. The brief argues that the Administration used national defense as a pretext to advance domestic energy policy and benefit a specific company. “This case is not about national defense. It is about a heavily leveraged, crude oil company asking the President to transform the Defense Production Act (DPA) from a statute designed to ‘assure the availability of domestic energy supplies for national defense needs,’ 50 U.S.C. § 4502(a)(5), into a corporate rescue operation for political allies; a rescue that advances the Administration’s political preference for fossil-fuel development at the expense of all other concerns,” wrote the lawmakers. “The Department of Energy’s (‘DOE’) March 13, 2026 order (the ‘Wright Order’) comes nowhere close to identifying a need for Sable crude oil or pipelines in the Order’s generalized invocation of California’s military presence and increased reliance on foreign crude. DOE never explains why those general circumstances create a national-defense need for Sable’s crude, much less how restarting its beleaguered pipelines would meet one.” “Merely invoking ‘national defense’ or an ‘emergency’ does not insulate executive action from the statutory prerequisites that Congress imposed in the DPA on the exercise of delegated authority,” continued the lawmakers. “Enforcing these requirements, i.e., that the Secretary establish the statutory predicates for invoking the DPA, does not amount to second-guessing genuine executive judgments about national defense. Instead, enforcement honors the conditions precedent Congress imposed to prevent abuse of the DPA. DOE’s failure to satisfy these statutory prerequisites invalidates the Wright Order.” In addition to Reps. Panetta and Carbajal and Sens. Padilla, Schiff, and Whitehouse, the amicus brief was filed by U.S. Representatives Jared Huffman (CA-02), Nancy Pelosi (CA-11), Zoe Lofgren (CA-18), Nanette Barragán (CA-44), Julia Brownley (CA-26), Laura Friedman (CA-30), Sydney Kamlager-Dove (CA-37), Mike Levin (CA-49), Sam Liccardo (CA-16), Ted Lieu (CA-36), Doris Matsui (CA-07), Dave Min (CA-47), and Kevin Mullin (CA-15), as well as U.S. Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL). “Trump is turning the Defense Production Act into a blank check for Big Oil,” said Rep. Huffman. “Emergency national security powers exist to protect this country in a crisis. They were never meant to force open an oil pipeline that has sat idle for more than a decade after fouling our coast. This is a fossil fuel giveaway dressed up as national security, designed to enrich Trump and reward his political allies. But it’s our beaches, our coastal communities, and the businesses that depend on a clean, healthy ocean that will face the consequences if we let his sham continue. We have cleaned up this company’s mess once already. Californians have defended this coast for decades, and we are not backing down.” “The Trump Administration’s abuse of the Defense Production Act to revive the Sable pipeline is an unlawful corporate giveaway masquerading as a national security measure,” said Speaker Emerita Pelosi. “California communities know the devastating consequences of offshore oil spills. Congress created the Defense Production Act to protect our national security—not to reward political allies, endanger our coastline and override vital environmental safeguards.” “As Chair of the California Democratic Congressional Delegation, we have been united against this Administration’s illegal attempts to force fossil fuel projects at the expense of our state’s environment and public health,” said Rep. Lofgren. “Trump has always put oil company profits above Americans’ well-being, but invoking the Defense Production Act for this pipeline is ridiculous. Californians don’t want a repeat of the 2015 oil spill, and the Administration is overstepping its authority to put our environment and coastal economy at risk.” In May 2026, Rep. Panetta joined his colleagues to request an investigation into Sable Offshore Corp.’s politicized efforts to restart oil drilling operations off the Santa Barbara coast and demanded answers about the company’s collaboration with the Trump Administration to invoke the Defense Production Act in relation to this project. Last year, members of the California congressional delegation demanded answers from the Trump Administration on its involvement in Sable Offshore Corporation’s attempts to restart offshore oil drilling using the same pipelines that caused the Refugio State Beach oil spill of 2015. The full amicus brief is available here . ###