Posted on 11/26/2024 3:20:24 AM PST by CFW
Amap of the U.S. showing land under federal control paints large swaths of the West. In August, Utah filed a lawsuit against the federal government, arguing that it’s unconstitutional for the feds to retain unappropriated land in a state indefinitely.
Since the lawsuit was filed, a dozen other states, including Idaho, Alaska and Wyoming, have filed briefs asking the court to hear the case. Additionally, a coalition of counties in Arizona and New Mexico, the Pacific Legal Foundation, the Utah Legislature and the Wyoming Legislature have also filed briefs in support of the lawsuit.
“The federal burden in the West infringes on our sovereignty and undermines our equality with other States, all in direct violation of the Constitution,” Rep. Harriet Hagemen, R-Wyo., told Just the News. Hageman joined Utah’s congressional delegation in filing a brief in support of the Supreme Court’s review of Utah’s complaint.
Unappropriated lands According to a “Stand For Our Land” website set up by the State of Utah to explain the lawsuit, the Bureau of Land Management restricts public use of federal lands, and these restrictions don’t help Utah efficiently and effectively manage its lands.
[snip]
The proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back was the BLM’s Public Lands Rule. The rule created “restoration leases” or “mitigation leases.” These work just like oil and gas or cattle grazing leases, except the “use” of the land would be to conserve it, which typically means erasing or eliminating human impact on the untouched landscape.
[snip]
Should the Supreme Court take up the case and ultimately rule in Utah’s favor, the ruling could potentially put 200 million acres of the West under state control.
(Excerpt) Read more at justthenews.com ...
I think Trump could simply order the Interior Department to turn over the land.
I hope they win.
I’m fine with this. Having no human impact on federal lands can lead to stuff like unmanageable wildfires from buildup of dry, dead vegetation.
I firmly believe that, apart from military bases and other properties actually supported by the Constitution, the feds should own no more than 10% of land in a given state, and preferably, they should own 0.
Yes, return it to the states where it belongs.
I would like to see a list of names/organizations who oppose putting the control back to the states.
The entire democrat party.
That was my first thought, but a Supreme Court ruling would prevent a future democrat administration from taking back the land.
Think oil and mining. The left doesn’t want either but the states will. Even Pennsylvania turned red over fracking.
the confiscation b of land during rat regimes is for thier purpose, control
The federal government authorized the creation of the western states.
It is up to the Congress to decide what to do with federal land.
“undermines our equality with other States”
I think federally created states should only have “necessary and proper” powers, unlike the original 13 states and Maine.
Governments really shouldn’t have unnecessary or improper power.
More than half of UT is Fed land. A big chunk of that is National Parks and military bombing ranges, but there’s a big bunch of recreational land locked up, affecting mineral and resource extraction.
The states are right.
I thot most of the western state charters for inclusion into US statehood included giving all the land back to the states.
The title is misleading as the lands cannot be given back to the states because the states never had it to begin with. The federal government acquired the lands and the states were created out of it via land grants and homesteading. Territorial governments were set up to govern the new cities, towns, ranches and farms. The Territories carved from federal lands then applied for statehood.
The lands not given out in this manner were kept by the feds.
What the states want to do is release ownership to the states. I do not see a Constitutional clause allowing the feds to retain land within a sovereign state’s borders. By rights it should be given up to the states, with exception to military lands. Even National Park Service land ownership should be signed over to the states.
“Multiuse” works great. Especially in the southwest because ranchers and others provide water to the indigenous species to help them from becoming extinct. They are right now going extinct because the BLM has shut down man made sources and made sure they do not have enough water. It is intentional so they can use the disappearance as a reason to grab even more land. Hegelian Dialect.
50% of the “unapprpriated” land should be returned to the states and 50% of it sold, to American citizens and American companies only, with the proceeds going towards paying down the federal debt.
I remember when Bill Clinton locked up millions of acres of coal fields in Utah to prevent them from being used. He declared the are a “National Monument.”
Sadly the power plants that could have used that coal have been decommissioned and destroyed.
What did not belong to a State to begin with cannot be returned to it. (It’s like “gun buybacks”. They can’t buy back what they didn’t own to start with.)
In past years several Territories were owned by the United States as a whole. Proposed States were carved out of these Territories. “Enabling Acts” were passed to enable the carve outs to become one of the United States. I can’t say the Enabling Acts all read the same, but in at least several cases, ownership of land within the boundaries of the new state did not fall to the new state, but was retained by the United States as a whole.
You can’t “return” such land to a state because it did not belong to it to start with.
Enabling Acts and much other information are contained in the following seven volume work which can be found in various places and forms on the internet:
“The Federal and State Constitutions Colonial Charters, and Other Organic Laws of the States, Territories, and Colonies Now or Heretofore Forming The United States of America” compiled and edited under an Act of Congress of June 30, 1906 by Francis Newton Thorpe, Ph.D., LL,D.
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.