Posted on 06/10/2017 12:58:37 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
It seems you can’t get anything done in California these days unless you can portray it as some element of the movement to RESIST Trump. (Well, you can try to put everyone on a single payer health plan which cost more than twice the value of the entire state’s economy, but that’s an exception.) The latest brainstorm comes to us from the state’s attorney general, who for some reason believes that the President of the United States doesn’t have any authority to modify national parks or monuments, though where he cooked up this idea remains unclear. (LA Times)
California’s attorney general argued Thursday that President Trump has no legal authority to revoke or modify national monuments created by previous administrations.
In an 11-page letter to the Interior Department, state Atty. Gen. Xavier Becerra vowed “to take any and all legal action necessary” to preserve six California monuments, including one in Los Angeles’ backyard, that the Trump Administration may attempt to revoke or shrink.
In April, Trump signed an executive order directing Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke to review all national monuments that were created since 1996 and are larger than 100,000 acres, or were expanded “without adequate public outreach.”
California has good reason to worry about Trump and Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke turning their gaze on the Golden State when they’re finished with Bear Ears. There are several more of these “national monuments” there which are nearly as bad. The San Gabriel Mountains National Monument is yet another gigantic swath of land taking up more than 345K acres which Obama designated as a “monument” rather than asking Congress to make it a national park.
The real question here is where the state attorney general is getting his information. We’ve been over this here before and the law is pretty clear. If you want to set aside vast tracts of land as a national park, Congress has to do that. The only thing the President can do is create national monuments, but the Antiquities Act of 1906 is pretty clear on what those are supposed to include. (Emphasis added)
That the President of the United States is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to declare by public proclamation historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the lands owned or controlled by the Government of the United States to be national monuments, and may reserve as a part thereof parcels of land, the limits of which in all cases shall be confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to the protected:
As to whether or not the President can order changes in status, we have adequate precedent there as well. In 1933 there were 56 National Monuments transferred to the Park Service. The same could be done with the ones in California and then the legislative branch could decide whether to keep them the same, shrink them or do away with them entirely. That’s how the system is set up to work. The state attorney general for California should know better, but this is probably just an effort to hurt the President as opposed to any serious legal inquiry.
That’s great.
So, you are a sovereign and you will demand an Alpha sovereign keep your lands off limits...
The insanity brought on by the mental disease of liberalism never ceases to fascinate me. We see a new example almost every single day.
At some point, there is gonna be some serious major pushback and it ain’t gonna be pretty.
Please, President Trump, do not “shrink” our National Monument to Fruit Loops...Please!!!!!
please secede already !!!!!!!!!!!!
Shouldn’t Becerra be fighting crime?
I enjoy watching democrats implode.
5.56mm
The liberal idiots of California almost all live piled on top of each other in carbon sucking LA and San Francisco area Counties.
Conservative California is in the rural areas.
The liberal freaks may not want Trump to speak for them but Conservative California doesn’t want them speaking for us
I think the president has the absolute authority to rescind these ‘national monument’ declarations, am I right? The state of CA then can make it a ‘state monument’ if they so desire. Then they can shoulder the responsibility for maintaining it. And more importantly the political responsibility for keeping these lands from being put to productive use.
The state government of California is cowardly. They don’t want to take responsibility for their crazy politics.
Well, Trump could call their bluff by vastly increasing national monuments in California.
Then California’s position would predictably fall in line with several Federal Districts on the matter of travel control: It’s OK if any President other than Trump does it, whatever it is.
There still is quite a bit of privately owned land in the Angeles Forest National Monument and even more permitted land (which no one seems to know who is supposed to be the authority to re-authorize such permits, or even how the approval process would go.)
All of this was claimed as part of the national monument and of course, not one penny of compensation was offered to the land owners.
Rolling back things like that national monument makes extreme amount of sense and if California dives in to make a legal mess of it, they’re going to have to address landowners; honestly, this is probably the best thing that could happen to them as they’ve been in limbo ever since Obama appeared in a county park 20 miles away from the monument he came to make a speech about. California’s lawsuit would open a lot of doors to getting this settled (and MUCH cheaper than filing their own lawsuits.)
Declare the California state capitol building a national monument, toss up a fence around it, and charge admission to the elected officials who want to enter. I'd imagine that would fix the legal questions about national monuments created without the permission of those who are directly affected by the monument.
Many if not all of this monument bs, has been a massive tax dodge for the left wing owners of the land.
They donate, get a huge tax write. The land is basically restricted to them and their heirs except for short periods of time.
Really something, Trump wants to give the states back the land the Feds stole from them and this asshat wants to stop him. At some this goes beyond a mental disorder.
If the President can designate monuments, why can’t the Prez de-designate them?
“California’s attorney general argued Thursday that President Trump has no legal authority to revoke or modify national monuments created by previous administrations. “
Unless he made them bigger, then this clown would have no issue.
Trump should use reverse logic on CA and expand all the national monuments in the state so every single acre is within a national monument. Totally shut down any construction or modification of any land within CA. No new roads. No development whatsoever. How you like them apples, CA?
State government politicians are not immune from arrest.
I have cousins who live in northern California. They tell me modern day California is already like two separate states.
Well, if California wants the land “preserved”, let them take it as a State Park and pay for it themselves.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.