First off, the Hammonds were convicted in court. Cliven Bundy lost in court, numerous times. Now, some don't recognize the court and are pursuing it with guns, like they do in Somalia, Yemen, and Afghanistan. Bundy is a warlord.
Second, Utah's Transfer of Public Lands Act is the leading legal attempt. That act required the feds to turn over the land on Jan 1, 2015. And of course the feds didn't turn over the land. Now the GOP controlled govt of Utah needs to make the next move, what ever their next move will be, and how much money are Utah taxpayers willing to waste, to pursue the next move.
You say the BLM is dictating use of the land, and/or the prez is using executive orders. Not true.
Congress enacted the Federal Lands and Policy Management Act of 1976, which determines how the federal lands are managed. FLPMA started the sagebrush rebellion. BLM was created in 1947 by merging the General Land Office and the Grazing Service, and was a relatively small agency. After FLPMA, BLM grows into a very large agency.
And it is other congressional act as well. Combine FLPMA and the Endangered Species Act and Cliven Bundy was required to reduce his herd.
Combine FLPMA and the Wilderness Act. In 1976 there were no Wilderness Areas. Now there are huge numbers of acres as wilderness and wilderness study areas.
There are also today a lot more recreation areas, campgrounds, and archeological sites than there was in 1976.
Combine FLPMA with the clean air act and there is a lot more coal mining on these federal lands than there was in 1976.
Combine FLPMA with the Wild Horse and Burro Act, and the grazing lease holders have to let these wild horses eat some of the grass and drink some of the water.
One of the main complaints is that there are fewer grazing leases and fewer acres being grazed than there were in 1976. But FLPMA says these lands have to be managed for multiple use, so Cattle grazing is not King, although the Cow-Calf economy through-out the west is huge.
Ben, buddy, please review your post #7. I’m not trying to be condescending or rude here, but your post was a bit off the mark.
Before you re-read your post, please read two other things first: Article I Section 8 of The Constitution of the United States (also nicknamed “the Powers of Congress”) and Amendment X of the Constitution’s Bill of Rights.
Article I Section 8 lists ALL of the powers given to Congress (along with a few others scattered around the Constitution). That’s it. Those are the ONLY things Congress may control.
Amendment X (”the Tenth Amendment”) says any power not SPECIFICALLY given to Congress, in writing, belongs to the States or to the people.
Now, back to your posting.
Yes, the Hammonds were convicted in a court of law. But this whole case highlights the AWFUL level of federal overreach involved. Were ANY of the federal laws they were prosecuted under actually legal according to the Constitution? One can argue that NONE of them were.
In your post you mention the Federal Lands & Policy Management Act. Where does that appear in Article I Section 8, unless you mean the “... Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings” which the central government had to PURCHASE with the CONSENT of that state’s Legislature?
The land in question was simply confiscated by the government, none of it purchased, when Oregon became a State. The land, all of it, rightfully belongs to Oregon. Huge swaths of all of the Western States are illegally owned by federal government.
The Endangered Species Act? Unconstitutional, according to the Tenth. This should be a State matter, not federal.
Wilderness Act? Same
Clean Air Act? Same
Wild Horse & Burro Act? Same ... again.
There is a storm brewing over a government that flips off the Constitution and passes any damn law it wants or writes regulations without oversight. Every aspect of your life is regulated, taxed, controlled, licensed or inspected by some federal entity or other, from the toothpaste you use in the morning to the energy-saving light bulb you switch off before you lay your head on your approved fire-retardant pillow. Enough!
So yes, the Hammonds were convicted by a court. And ... ?