Skip to content
Sign in
Energy · North America

Kern judge’s tentative ruling says California fracking ban was improperly adopted, could reopen county

Kern County Superior Court Judge Bernard C. Barmann Jr. issued a tentative ruling finding California’s prohibition on well stimulation treatments an invalid underground regulation. The ruling could allow oil producers to seek permits that the judge said were previously denied on an unsupported climate-change rationale and, according to the New York Post, could open access to “one billion” barrels of oil in Kern County.

AI-assisted synthesis · Based on 3 independent reports from 4 outlets · Full text read from 1 of 3 reportsHow it's made

4 outletsLatest reporting 4 min read
Coverage: Mostly CenterL 0 · C 2 · R 1 · 1 unrated
Updat3 graphic: United States
Updat3 graphic · Map data: Natural Earth Natural Earth (public domain)

What happened

Key facts

  • Kern County Superior Court Judge Bernard C. Barmann Jr. issued a tentative ruling that found California’s prohibition on well stimulation treatments to be an "invalid underground regulation." (per New York Post).
  • The ruling said the restriction was "adopted without the rulemaking the Administrative Procedure Act requires." (per New York Post).
  • The judge wrote that permit denials were "arbitrary and unsupported" because they rested on a climate-change rationale that he said was not the operative basis for the ban (per New York Post).
  • The tentative ruling begins a review process ahead of a final decision, which the New York Post said is typically issued within 50 days (per New York Post).
  • The New York Post reported the ruling could reopen Kern County to oil producers and allow access to what it described as "one billion" barrels of oil in Kern County (per New York Post).
  • The New York Post said the tentative decision came two years after the state formally banned the practice and five years after it stopped approving fracking applications (per New York Post).
  • Association President Jodie Mueller told KGET she and the association were "extremely pleased to see the ruling," quoted in the New York Post (per New York Post).
  • Goldrushcam.com's headline stated the Center for Biological Diversity reported the tentative decision invalidates California’s fracking ban, suggesting extreme oil extraction could return (per goldrushcam.com).

The brief

A tentative ruling by Kern County Superior Court Judge Bernard C. Barmann Jr. could clear a legal path to revive hydraulic fracturing in Kern County, according to the New York Post.

In his preliminary decision, the judge concluded that California’s ban on well stimulation treatments was adopted as an "invalid underground regulation" and that the restriction lacked the rulemaking procedures the Administrative Procedure Act requires, the Post reported.

The ruling also criticised prior permit denials as "arbitrary and unsupported," saying they relied on a climate-change rationale that the judge said was not the operative basis for the ban, the Post wrote. The New York Post said the tentative ruling could allow oil producers to seek approvals the state and regulators have withheld in recent years.

The Post described the potential resource at stake as "one billion" barrels of oil in Kern County, and it said the decision comes two years after the state formally banned the practice and five years after regulators stopped approving fracking applications.

The article quotes local industry voices: Jodie Mueller, identified as an association president, told KGET she was "extremely pleased to see the ruling," the Post reported.

The Post also relayed a contrasting comment from Cesar Aguirre of the Central California Environmental Justice Network, who told KGET that SB 237, legislation passed last year, already provides a path to approve up to 2,000 new drilling permits. That comment, as presented in the Post, points to an existing statutory process separate from the judge’s legal finding.

The New York Post noted the ruling is tentative and begins a review process that typically results in a final decision within 50 days. The Post referenced local broadcast coverage at KGET for several quoted reactions.

A headline from Goldrushcam.com stated the Center for Biological Diversity reported the tentative decision invalidates California’s fracking ban and could put extreme oil extraction back in play; KGET and AOL carried headline accounts that the Kern County judge’s ruling could overturn California’s fracking law.

At this stage, the New York Post’s article confines its reporting to the judge’s tentative language, the Post’s characterization of the county’s oil resource, the timeline the Post gives for finalisation of the ruling, and quoted local reactions to the preliminary decision.

The Post’s account frames the ruling as a potential reopening of permitting that authorities and industry had curtailed in recent years, while noting that the decision remained under review and not yet final.

Why it matters

  • Residents living in Kern County face a concrete change in regulatory oversight because the ruling could reopen permit applications that had been denied, altering local oil and permitting activity described in the New York Post.
  • Oil producers operating in Kern County have a documented economic interest: the New York Post identified approximately "one billion" barrels of oil in Kern County that the Post said could become accessible if permits are approved.
  • The Central California Environmental Justice Network has a documented procedural pathway at issue: Cesar Aguirre told KGET, quoted in the New York Post, that SB 237 provides for approval of up to 2,000 new drilling permits, a statutory mechanism the Post reported alongside the judge’s ruling.

What to watch next

  • Whether Judge Bernard C. Barmann Jr. issues a final decision after the tentative ruling within the review period the New York Post said is typically 50 days.
  • Whether oil producers apply for new or previously denied permits in Kern County following the judge’s tentative ruling, as described by the New York Post.
  • Whether state regulators or parties challenge or seek to uphold the ban in filings or proceedings after the judge’s tentative ruling becomes final or is contested.

How it's being covered

Coverage analysisShow details
4 source articles · 4 unique outlets · 3 distinct reports
Coverage mix: Mostly Center· 2 Center · 1 Right
Where the outlets are based: US/Canada 75% · Unknown 25%
Coverage mix
Mostly Center
Left
Center
Right
0 outlets
2 outlets
1 outlet
The marker shows coverage balance: each unique outlet counts once. 1 unrated outlet is not included.
Geography
Where the outlets covering this story are based.
4 unique outletsDominant coverage: US/Canada
Coverage imbalance
  • Coverage is currently concentrated among outlets based in US/Canada (3 of 4 geographically-identified sources).
How we measure coverage

How outlets' accounts compare

Updat3 does not yet have enough full reports to compare how outlets framed this story.

How we got here

In 2024 the State of California enacted a formal prohibition on well-stimulation treatments, a statutory step that sets the immediate regulatory backdrop for the current dispute.

In 2021 California state agencies stopped approving new fracking and other well-stimulation permit applications, a pause that preceded the 2024 prohibition and frames the five-year administrative history at issue.

Original sources

1 of 4 articles · Unknown · Show all

Every story links to the reporting it was built from. How we choose sources

Spotted a factual error, a broken link or a misleading summary? Tell us.