Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BUSH: NINE FORMER PRESIDENTS WRONG; CLINTON RIGHT!
Mountain States Legal Foundation ^ | August 1, 2002 | William Perry Pendley

Posted on 08/03/2002 12:05:07 PM PDT by Action-America

BUSH: NINE FORMER PRESIDENTS WRONG; CLINTON RIGHT!

by William Perry Pendley

August 1, 2002

In 1872, Congress enacted the General Mining Law, allowing miners to enter onto federal land, locate valuable mineral deposits, and then develop those minerals. Once claims were staked, they were inviolate against all others, except the United States, which could challenge their validity at any time. Miners had to perform annual assessment work or else the land was open to relocation by rival claimants as if no prior claim existed. However, if the original claimant resumed work before such relocation, the claim was preserved. Often called the “resumption doctrine,” this is the “statutory right to resume work.”

While the “right to resume work” protected claims against rival miners, did it apply to the United States? In 1930, the United States told the U.S. Supreme Court that it did not: claims were forfeited if a miner failed to perform assessment work, even if the miner resumed work before a challenge by the United States. The Supreme Court unanimously rejected that argument, emphasizing: “[I]t is…clear that [a miner] maintains his claim…by a resumption of work…. Such resumption does not restore a lost estate; it preserves an existing estate.” Thereafter, the United States challenged claims for lack of assessment work only during a lapse in the work; but the Supreme Court later rejected that too, ruling that there was no authority for it. In 1970, the Supreme Court backtracked slightly: the United States did have that authority. But the Supreme Court left its 1930 ruling standing: a miner maintained his claim if he resumed work before the United States challenged his claims.

Not surprisingly, given the frequent and consistent rulings of the Supreme Court affirming the rights of a miner to “preserve an existing [claim]” by resuming assessment work, the United States took the view, from 1930 on, that claims were invalid only if the United States instituted its challenge during a lapse in assessment work. Then in 1993, in Clinton’s first year, the United States reversed 63 years of official policy and rejected the rulings of the Supreme Court: the statutory right to resume work was dead; in its place was a regulation that automatically voided claims upon a lapse in assessment work.

Meanwhile, in 1917, four oil shale claims were located on 520 acres in Uintah County, Utah. In March 1989, the owner of the claims, Cliffs Synfuel Corporation, filed an application for title (patent) to those claims. In October 1992, the United States said Cliffs had complied with federal law and was entitled to a certificate ending its duty to perform assessment work. But in 1996, the United States declared the claims null and void because, during the 75 years the claims were held, there had been a lapse in assessment work, which the United States had never challenged. A federal district court reinstated the claims, holding, “the Supreme Court knows how to say a statute is invalid;” because it did not declare the statutory right to resume work invalid, that provision was still alive!

The Bush Administration appealed the decision to the Tenth Circuit. On May 6, 2002, lawyers from Bush’s Justice Department argued that 63 years of interpreting the mining law were irrelevant and the Supreme Court’s decisions, which had bound the federal government for nine presidencies, were wrong. A three judge panel, deferring to the federal government’s expertise, agreed: the claims were null and void. Cliffs asked the entire Tenth Circuit to rehear the case and will petition the Supreme Court if the Tenth Circuit fails to rectify its error. President Bush reportedly is seeking to restore stability and steadfastness to a Justice Department that had a reputation, during Clinton’s years, for scandal and schizophrenia. But which is worthy of Bush’s embrace: three Supreme Court rulings and the official policy of nine presidents spanning more than six decades, or a dubious regulation adopted because of the anti-mining zealotry of William Jefferson Clinton? Sadly, Bush chose the latter.


Each month, MSLF president and chief legal officer William Perry Pendley publishes his monthly column, Summary Judgment. A hard-hitting commentary on environmental, federal lands, natural resources, or private property rights issues, Summary Judgment is carried by newspapers, magazines, newsletters and other publications throughout the country. So topical are the issues addressed by Summary Judgment that they are often the focus of talk radio discussion for weeks after the column is sent out at the end of each month. Summary Judgment runs 650 words and may be reprinted so long as credit is given to William Perry Pendley and to Mountain States Legal Foundation. A glossy photograph of the author is available.

 


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Front Page News; Government
KEYWORDS: addakeyword; bshere; bush; bushbotmigraine; democratic; justicedepartment; landgrab; mining; powergrab; propaganda; ruling; scotuslist; sophomoricposter; supremecourt; yawn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 last
To: Satadru
Perhaps to you Bush is a disappointment, to me he is not. I would be honored to vote for him AGAIN in the next election. Take your Bush bashing elsewhere.
81 posted on 08/04/2002 11:14:28 AM PDT by myrabach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: AmishDude
Come on, when a guy posts with rainbow colors, links his own website and generally acts like an arrogant goof, it's not hard to figure him out.

There's a whole cadre of those anti-tax flying monkeys that do the same thing.

I've never been able to figure out WHY they think such an obnoxious posting style (and convoluted, warped, perturbed and hopelessly flawed economic theory) would be helpful to their agenda.
I can only conclude that they've discovered a way to eek-out a parasitic living by gathering donations from the terminally gullible.

82 posted on 08/04/2002 11:26:48 AM PDT by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Action-America
Think about it...

You're asking too much of this crowd. They're incapable of thought. We can't accuse them of eating their own, because conservatives are alien to them. They're big government liberals who would vote for Hillary if the GOP ran her for president.

Good post from a solid source. Do us another one, AA.

83 posted on 08/05/2002 4:01:34 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat
Uh, not just anyone can edit posts.

Anyone with a valid account can add a keyword, kid. I just added "mining" to the list. See?

84 posted on 08/05/2002 4:06:45 PM PDT by Twodees
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

Well...I see now there is a new feature (or an old one I never noticed) that, yes, anyone (at least a registered user) can apparently add key words. So I shall retract the previous claim otherwise as being an error on my part.
85 posted on 08/05/2002 10:59:12 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-85 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson