The Enclave Clause as ruled by SCOTUS in Fort Leavenworth R. Co. v. Lowe, 114 U.S. 525, 531, 5 S.Ct. 995, 29 L.Ed. 264 (1885). I am aware of this as I was for a time, the acting Garrison NCOIC for Ft Leavenworth.
In 1885, the Supreme Court ruled that there were two additional ways in which the United States could acquire federal enclaves: (1) the states could “cede” legislative jurisdiction to the United States, and (2) the United States could “reserve” legislative jurisdiction at the time of statehood. The Supreme Court added that these “cessions” and “reservations” were not limited to Enclave Clause (”needful building”) purposes.
Since the land transferred to the US government per the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (Article II Section 2 Treaty clause) and since the State of Nevada ceded the lands to the US Government as part of their Constitution, the lands belong to the US Government as a federal enclave. Further, since the lands are part of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area and needful buildings have been built on that property, the US Government owns and controls the land per Article I Section 8 both by fact and by SCOTUS ruling.
Don’t forget that SCOTUS also ruled:
1. It was legal for one man to own another as property.
2. It is legal to rend unborn babies limb-from-limb if they’re inconvenient.
I forgot one:
3. By not engaging in interstate commerce, you are engaging in interstate commerce.
Your relentless repetition of the Enclave Clause having something to do with nearby Lake Mead is pointless and it is irrelevant. There are no buildings on this property. It is designated as Open Range. There is no military installation there, it's scrub brush and cows. That is it. The approximation of Lake Mead is irrelevant... if it WAS relevant, then the BLM would be claiming Lake Mead as a reason for their appropriation of the land. THEY NEVER DID. They claimed the land was to be taken as a preserve for a turtle. So I repeat to you once again, as everyone else has also done ad nauseum, your point is irrelevant.
I know this is pointless arguing with "tax control," since they are simply going to cut and paste the Enclave Clause plus the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo over and over again because that is what they are being paid to do. Good for them. BUT for those readers who are confused, just know this: 50 representatives from the 9 western states who are being treated as second-class citizens (aka, being treated as "territories" and not as "states") met last week to discuss how to get our lands back from the illegal & unconstitutional holding of the federal government. This process was started last year when concern regarding federal mismanagement of wild lands resulting in catastrophic wildfires that are destroying our wildernesses and resources reached a fever pitch. Now, after the Bundy saga, it has been dramatically brought to the forefront. If you are a resident of any of the western states, you should look into what is going on around you. You should be asking, "Why are states east of Colorado being treated differently from those west of? Why did they never receive their land held in trust while all the eastern & mid-western states did?" I recommend these videos as a primer on what is really going on and disregard this idiot "taxcontrol" who is a paid shill for someone.
Kirk MacKenzie, DefendRuralAmerica.org Presentation on Jurisdiction
Reclaiming Our Land - UT Rep Ken Ivory
MT Senator Jennifer Fielding at AmericanLandsCouncil.org
Stephen Pratt Speaking at WSSA Conference: Federal Lands Jurisdiction 1 of 3
Stephen Pratt Speaking at WSSA Conference: Federal Lands Jurisdiction 2 of 3
Stephen Pratt Speaking at WSSA Conference: Federal Lands Jurisdiction 3 of 3
At this point, taxcontrol, I am done responding to you. Have a nice life and seriously... you should look into a more honorable form of employment.