I agree with you. It was never the intention to have Federal Lands....excepting....Indian Lands, Forts and Highways. Excepting Indian Lands, Forts and Highways should have reverted to the States.
Can’t “take back” land you never had title to.
One more item to add to the long list of things that can be accomplished if we elect a conservative President in 2016.
The Act by which Utah became a state, 1894: “That the people inhabiting said proposed State to agree and declare that they forever
disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within the boundaries thereof; ... and that until the title thereto
shall have been extinguished by the United States, the same shall be and remain subject to the
disposition of the United States...”
What part of “forever” does the state legislature not understand?
Kingdoms and lords own land, democratic/republican governments do not, other than those for facilities to perform their functions. There is not one legitimate reason for a government to personally possess land beyond that.
The land was federal territory before it was federal land. It was never state land.
State officials need to occupy it and see how far the Feds go to try to get it back.
Could get very interesting.
Agreed. If the Feds want to continue to administrate Yellowstone etc that’s OK with me but other than that they have no business owning huge swaths of state lands.
Good. I hope other western states do the same (since they are most enslaved by gubbmint lands); then I hope the rest of the country does the same
Have they put a stop to sodomite marriage yet?
Utah might wake up to discover Obola has sold it to Iran...
But, the federal govt became owner of the remainder either by war, out right purchase, or treaty. The only exception would be Texas which was created by a revolution against Mexico, and then later joined the union.
If the govt had not acquired these lands, none of these states would have come into existence.
This will eventually come down to the considerations (or whims) of one SJC judge.
I don’t think that’s the way the Founders expected their system to work. At least, I think they would think that issues which wound up in the SJC would be rarer, and determined by larger majorities. Now, almost anything that involves a counter to the Executive Branch is both a big deal in the sense of being unusual, and also commonplace, in the sense of being necessary.
I agree, this should have happened long ago.
Btw, welcome Freeper.
Go, Utah!!
I wonder what would happen if a state (better yet, a large number of states) simply activated the state guard to politely go in and take control of national forest - BLM land - national wildlife refuge - etc. land, escorting federal forest rangers, BLM employees and suchlike off the property and wishing them a nice day.
It would also be great to see Texas, Utah, Arizona and other like-minded states send in the guard or state police to take over the operation of national parks the next time a president (invariably a dem) shuts them down. What would the federales do, one wonders?
if the house and senate republicans do anything this year they must support this move.
Without the federal lands in the west Washington loses much of her imperal control over the people there.
Good.
I hope it’s phenomenally successful.
Utah and everyone else should remember Murphy’s Law:
“A Smith and Wesson beats 4 Aces”
Putting the lands back under state jurisdiction is a good thing, so long as we remember how the other side plays cards.
Just my $0.02