Opponents of the U.S. Air Force’s decision to base next-generation F-35 fighter planes at Burlington International Airport have taken their case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Activists have asked the high court to hear their appeal of a March Vermont Supreme Court ruling, which said the airport did not need to obtain state land use permits to base the new jets at the airport.Â
The case is a long-shot to be argued in Washington, D.C.: The U.S. Supreme Court accepts about 1 percent of appeals annually.
But James Dumont, the Bristol attorney who represents the anti-F-35 activists, said the appeal was worth filing. “We respectfully disagree with the [Vermont] Supreme Court’s opinion, and if possible, we’d like the nine justices of the Supreme Court to disagree.”Â
The appeal was drafted by D.C. attorney David Frederick, along with a professor and students at the University of Texas School of Law.
Opponents argued that the City of Burlington, which owns the airport, was required to obtain a state Act 250 permit to account for the noise impact of the 18 F-35s, which are scheduled to arrive in 2020. The F-35 is louder than the F-16s currently based at the airport, which is home to the Vermont Air National Guard.
But the Vermont Supreme Court upheld lower court decisions that an Act 250 permit was not required: Federal regulations and the Federal Aviation Administration have jurisdiction over noise-related matters at the airport, and trumped any state concerns, the court ruled.
“Any action to regulate a change in use to the F-35 would amount to an attempt to regulate noise and be preempted,” the Vermont Supreme Court said in its ruling.
It is only one part of the activists’ legal push to prevent the F-35s from arriving in Vermont. They have also sued the Air Force in U.S. District Court in Burlington, saying the Pentagon’s environmental review of the basing decision was flawed. The City of Winooski, where hundreds of residents live directly under the planes’ proposed flight path, has also joined that lawsuit after residents voted in March to side with the activists.
The district court lawsuit is winding through the pre-trial phase, and most major filings are scheduled to be submitted by April.
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
kooks in kourt , no chance
What does state and local land use law have to do with any matter of federal law?
Reminds me of David and Goliath….the simple fact is, the heavily fuel loaded, technically challenged military F-35 does not have any business flying low over residential neighborhoods with thousands of families and children, disrupting the environment with noise and pollution, and endangering the lives of tax paying people. A more appropriate airport and location should have been considered. It wasn’t and shame on our “reps” (Bernie included) who supported it and who only listened to the military and business developers AND not to the people and towns it will affect the greatest. I hope all these legal filings will have an impact and call attention to the unfairness and danger of it all…Even Goliath was felled with a simple rock and sling…
As exemplified by his Iraq War vote, Bernie is much better than Hillary with respect to the military-industrialists & national security state. That said, his iron-clad support for the F-35 is down-right shameful. Not only is it destroying the home values and neighborhoods of his most vulnerable constituents (who he refused to meet with). It undermines everything else he talks about and all the programs he purports to support. $1.5 trillion of fraud and waste, down the toilet while Washington lobbyists & Texas Lockheed executives laugh all the way to the bank. Imagine what that money could do for infrastructure, student debt, Social Security and other programs Bernie talks about.
When this is not heard by the Supremes, what will be the next thing to protest?
As someone who used to live just outside the 65 dB zone, I tip my hat to the protestors. Stationing the F35 at the Burlington ANG base will lead directly to destruction of affordable housing, in an area that desperately needs it.
That air frame is such a white whale. With any luck the program will be killed before it arrives if we work that angle of the case.
I am so sick of these left wing out of staters liberals who have moved to Vermont and tell us true Vermonters how to live.. I for one love the idea of having these jets in my state.. knowing they are here if we need them..I feel safe..I use to work in So Burlington for 6 yrs out in back of the airport.. it was amazing to hear them fire up..I would watch the after burners and see them take off.. I worked in a office and yes it was hard to hear someone on the phone but the customer didn’t mind waiting..must had been true Vermonters..we love and support our Military..Stop being haters of the Military, you don’t like hearing them then move some were else..I am for the F-35’s and will SUPPORT THEM as a true 6th generation Vermonters…
Go Donna, right there with you. I too support our military, note I did not say I support war, but defense. Having these jets is part of the price we pay for freedom and our way of life and I salute people who sacrifice their time and energy to serve our country. I take pause every time an F16 goes over my house, wonderful to watch. I actually few an F16 simulator at a trade show years back, it was a blast until I crashed it into the ocean LOL. I am not a Vermonter by birth, but after 30 years certainly a Vermonter at heart and a patriot too.
For those of you who have a disdain for the f-35 I have a disdain for you. I do not understand why you protest technology. It is advancing. if you have the ability to use a device to comment on this article… that device was provided to you through technology advancements made by multiple people in multiple points on this planet. Our government has worked very hard to protect us from harm… if you remember correctly wasn’t it the Burlington division of the Air National Guard that responded to the 9/11 attacks on New York City? I am so proud of our Air and Army National Guard troops here in Vermont and the role they play. My father was a World War 2 veteran is no longer with us. I was never in the military myself
. When I see one of the members of our very esteemed Patriots, I open the door for them and call them sir or ma’am because I respect what they do… you’re here on this planet and protected because of them. Show some respect and allow technology to advance so that you can continue to protest but sleep well at night.
Boston Globe – April 13, 2013
“Selection of Vermont Guard base for F-35 jets was based on flawed data, raising questions of political influence
Some Pentagon officials say the basing decision was rigged to please Leahy, a defense police powerhouse.”
Any problems with the F-35 will be squarely in the lap of Senator Leahy!
Is Trump more progressive than Bernie? Certainly the liberals in Canada are. Here is what Trump says about the F-35: http://www.13newsnow.com/story/news/milita…. Maybe the “Trumper” is smarter than I thought? Who knew. Time to ask Bernie again, why he continues to support the F-35. Oh, maybe he is just afraid to challenge Leahy?
I think it is interesting that the F-35 supporters in these comments, assume that those that oppose this plane are anti-military, disrespectful of our service men and women and are against “technology”, which is not the case. What we are opposing is the Vermont location (a small airport surrounded by homes, schools, businesses) and the low flying over these areas AND the blatant disregard of these tax paying people when the decision was made by a few representatives and business developers. As far as the “technology” of this plane, all reports point that this loud, multi-million dollar machine is still having problems with fuel, take offs, landing gears, etc. Do you want this flying over our neighborhoods, endangering our loved ones? I don’t…
To all the backyard defenders who moan when the see a jet fly overhead,, , I see now that this is really a case of “Not in my Backyard” , at least from one poster. I am sure there would be no discussion if this was based in Plattsburgh. Fact is, the Vermont National Guard has had planes based here since the early 50s, and according to the VNG website, is well over 350 years old,, which likely predates all or most of us LOL According to Wikipedia, the original airplane based mission was New England air defense, and I imagine it still is and especially was on 9/11.
Bringing Trump, Leahy, Sanders into the discussion is comical at best. So is the accusation of safety, , most people know flying is about as safe as you can get, which does not mean there are no accidents, but really, do we want to live in fear of something like that.
.So you protesters decided to move ot Burlington, or you were raised here, makes no difference, the planes came first and you can leave if you do not like it. Strategically Burlington is well suited for this, being close to a border, Boston, NYC, and everything in between. Turning a fleet change into a political discussion is just an excuse to be against the military in the first place. Of course that is not reality and never will be.
Looking forward to our next generation of fighter jets overhead here.
I would like to respond to the latest of Pixelvt’s posting and Donna Boutin’s comments. I can understand this can be a “heated” subject, but I have been respectful in stating my opinions and have not asked you to “move” out of Vermont, or being called “left wing liberals” simply because you do not agree with a different opinion. I am a third generation “true” Vermonter, and my family members have proudly served our country. I love our state and this is my home, which is precisely, why I am against the F-35’s in my “backyard” and yes, I do believe another location with a better suited airport, with NO residential homes as their neighbors, is more appropriate. Re my referral of Leahy, Sanders, etc. and your comment as this being “comical”…they are suppose to be the representatives of ALL the people in Vermont, yet they supported bringing this heavily fueled, louder military jet to a small airport and refused to meet or listen to the people who elected them AND who live in the neighborhoods that will be affected by its coming.
Military statistics show that the F-35 is still having mechanical difficulties with its fuel storage and take off and landing gears. It IS a safety issue because they are ascending or descending over heavily populated areas. Military statistics also state that in the event of an accident, ONE plane would destroy 10+miles, which means South Burlington, Burlington, Winooski and Williston would suffer. As stated before, it is not an anti-military issue, it is an environmental, noise, health and safety issue against having this elite war machine flying over thousands of families, our homes, schools and businesses. I think the VANG is important and strong enough to survive in this area even if they didn’t have the F-35’s to rely on…