If and when the BLM grants some sort of approval, any party who has been participating in the NEPA process would have standing to commence litigation. Depending on what happens with the NHPA process, the Hualapai may also have a cause of action under the NHPA.
Presumably, any party that commences litigation will file a motion for some sort of interim relief along with the initiating complaint - a motion for a temporary restraining order and/or a motion for preliminary injunction.
Disposition of the interim relief motion(s) should not take long. If a motion for p.i. is filed, that could be briefed, argued, and decided in a month. (The TRO motion would be resolved more quickly, but any TRO issued by a judge would likely last for a maximum of 10 days.)
In the case of Thacker Pass, the judge denied interim injunctive relief and allowed LAC to proceed with drilling pending a final disposition of the case. The same could conceivably happen in this case, if and when BLM issues it’s approval. That would presumably be the best case for AZL shareholders, though AZL would still have some overhang from litigation risk.
Judges in Arizona are all over the map on this kind of case. Some would be sympathetic to the environmentalists and the Hualapai; others would not be so inclined.
AZL Price at posting:
6.2¢ Sentiment: Sell Disclosure: Not Held
(20min delay)