Defense Production Act Meets California: Taking the Safety Off American Energy

I can smell the panic before the TV even warms up: diesel on cold steel, hickory smoke in the air, and California’s paperwork factories firing up like a leaf blower at a funeral. These folks can turn one shovel of dirt into a three-year group project with 14 agencies and a feelings appendix.

But Washington is reaching for a different toolbox. Not the yoga mat. The wrench set.

Burgum signals the DPA is on the table

Bloomberg News reports Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said the Trump administration is considering using the Defense Production Act, a Cold War-era law, to ease permitting and help Sable Offshore restart oil production off the coast of California. Burgum said it is “absolutely” under deliberation. That is not a whisper. That is a tailgate slam.

There is also a Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel opinion dated March 3, 2026. It addresses whether a presidential order under the Defense Production Act could preempt conflicting state laws that block domestic energy production, in the context of Sable Offshore’s Santa Ynez Unit and its pipeline system.

Now, let’s keep the adult labels on the jars: an OLC memo is not a court ruling. It is executive-branch legal advice, not a magic wand that ends every lawsuit. But it is a flare over Sacramento that says the federal government is at least asking the question out loud.

The DPA is a steel-toe boot, not a climate club

The Defense Production Act is built for moments when a nation decides it would like to keep existing as a nation. It gives the president broad authority to prioritize and allocate materials and industrial capacity for national defense, and it includes language tied to maximizing domestic energy supplies.

• Preemption: DOJ’s opinion says a valid federal order can carry the force of federal law and preempt conflicting state rules.
• Liability debate: The legal analysis also includes whether an order could displace certain state-law liability for actions taken in compliance with that order.

Everybody wants safe pipelines. I do too. I like my brisket smoked, not my coastline. But California’s modern governing religion is control dressed up as safety.

Meet the villains: permit clergy and lawfare

California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit on January 23, 2026, challenging federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration actions involving the Las Flores Pipelines (CA-324 and CA-325) and steps that would allow them to restart.

Zoom out: California passed Senate Bill 237, effective January 1, 2026, adding requirements for restarting oil and gas facilities and pipelines that have been idled for years. The California Coastal Commission has also reminded Sable it believes it has independent authority over resuming those pipelines.

The bigger fight

This is not about pretending the 2015 spill never happened. Californians remember it, and any restart has to be done with serious monitoring and accountability. The argument on the table is whether one state can effectively veto domestic energy development in federal waters by stacking procedural tripwires onshore.

The courts will have their say. California will sue. Of course they will. Even the reporting makes clear this is a consideration, not a final presidential order already issued. But the signal is clear: energy independence is being treated as national security, not a vibes-based hobby.

Light the grill, not the red tape.