Minister Mark Carney faces a wave of court challenges to his decision to fast-track a pipeline project under a legal mechanism his government devised to speed up construction of major infrastructure.

Nine Indigenous groups have requested that a judge review and overturn the Canadian government’s Oct. 1 order to designate a proposed crude oil pipeline from Alberta to the west coast as a “project of national interest” to accelerate its building.

The fresh claims filed Oct. 30 come from British Columbia communities including the Cheam First Nation, Boston Bar First Nation, Lower Nicola Indian Band, Kwantlen First Nation and Tsartlip First Nation, according to a Monday news release.

The Cheam’s claim is filed against Canada and Alberta. A filing alleges Carney’s cabinet “erred in law by proceeding without adequate consultation” with Indigenous groups, citing rights recognized in Canada’s constitution. It also cites Canada’s commitments to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

“My fundamental, basic message to the corporations is: Buyers beware when you invest in British Columbia, because we’re not standing down,” Grand Chief Stewart Phillip, president of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs, said at a news conference.

The new challenges follow one already filed by the Cold Lake First Nations in October. That group is based in the oil-producing province of Alberta.

The pipeline’s “national interest” status comes from a law passed by Carney’s government last year, a central pillar of its strategy to grow the economy and diversify trade in response to President Donald Trump’s tariffs. The law allows the government to review selected projects based on “how” they should proceed, versus “whether” they should. A representative for the government’s Privy Council Office didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

The million-barrels-per-day oil pipeline, dubbed “Pacific Link,” was the first project to be designated under Carney’s Building Canada Act and is seen as key to diversifying Canadian exports. It’s largely expected to follow the route of the existing Trans Mountain pipeline, but end at a new terminal south of Vancouver that can accommodate larger oil tankers.

Jessica Clogg, a lawyer for one of the applicant nations, said one of the cases argues that if a judge finds that “free, prior and informed” consent is not possible under the Building Canada Act, then they also want a declaration that the law is inconsistent with UNDRIP.

“We have a real battle on our hands,” said Terry Teegee, the elected regional chief of the British Columbia Assembly of First Nations. The government’s objective of getting projects approved in “one year, one review” is “untenable,” he said.

“We’re not asking any more — we’re telling you to come out to British Columbia, come out and meet with our chiefs and our leadership,” he said in a message to the prime minister.

The expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline also faced legal challenges from First Nations, forcing the federal government to redo part of its Indigenous consultations. Similar court challenges also contributed to the cancellation of Enbridge Inc.’s proposed Northern Gateway pipeline to BC’s north coast.