On December 4, 2016, the Army Corp of Engineers made the decision to deny the construction of a specific segment of the Dakota Access Pipeline that would run under the Missouri River, and more specifically, Lake Oahe, which was a source of protest from the Standing Rock Sioux, as it was their sole water supply. The tribe has protested the pipeline’s construction since its introduction in 2014, and in recent months, the outcries have grown louder. So much so, that opposition has been radicalized on both ends: violent fringe protesters, and aggressive police. Jo-Ellen Darcy, the Army Corp’s assistant secretary for civil works, chose to explore alternative routes, and conduct an additional environmental analysis–stating that the White House Policy on Environmental Quality requires “heightened agency” in matters concerning tribal resources. Pipeline opponents are pressing for the release of an Environmental Impact Statement, which would stop the construction of the pipeline completely.

The Standing Rock Sioux erupted in celebration when they heard the news, and environmental groups did as well, but they cautioned to remain vigilant because the corp’s decision could possibly be reversed by president-elect Donald Trump. A denial from the corp would only be in effect until January 20, when Trump has the power to reverse the decision.

Donald Trump has openly expressed his support for the pipeline project and has advocated for deregulation in the crude oil industry, so chances of the corp’s decision remaining final are slim.

Craig Stevens, a spokesperson for MAIN ( the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now), has spoken out against Trump’s recent support, saying that it is “a purely political decision,” and is “only an attempt to enhance his reputation among the extreme left.” Since environmental protection is a typically left-wing dominated topic, it would seem Mr. Trump felt compelled to position himself against it.

Other Republicans have voiced their opposition to the corp’s decision. House Speaker Paul Ryan spoke out against the action, saying that it was “big government decision-making at its worst”, and he is “looking forward to putting this anti-energy presidency behind us.”

What Ryan refers to in this comment, is the concerning amount of authority the Obama administration has over how a business can operate. Does Energy Transfer’s massive influence on the Native-American population equate with an equally large amount of government interference? Is government intervention only justifiable when it involves big business? What will prevent the government from involving itself on a smaller scale if it can on a macro-scale? But is the Obama administration really “anti-energy”?

What is next for the Standing Rock Sioux is entirely in the hands of Donald Trump, although there is the possibility of  his decision being overturned in a court challenge. As neither side reveals any plan to compromise, since both consider it a matter of their livelihoods and rights as citizens–the pipeline having its right to business and the Sioux their right to peacefully coexist–the struggle over the Dakota Access Pipeline is long from over.