Since you did not factually address or refute anything in my statement, I’m not sure what your response is supposed to mean. Do you think the federal government should have unlimited power to own real estate?
Since you did not factually address or refute anything in my statement, I’m not sure what your response is supposed to mean. Do you think the federal government should have unlimited power to own real estate?I think, in accordance with existing law, that the federal government owns real estate signed to it by treaty that has not been homesteaded and/or claimed by the state the property resides in. Since no title of ownership has been filed on this land by a private individual, since the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, it's the Fed's land. Since the State of Nevada hasn't claimed the land, it's the Fed's land. That's what I think and that's what the law thinks. If you want the law to think different, as you proposed, you have to prove in court why that's unConstitutional.