Third. That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States; and that lands belonging to citizens of the United States, residing without the said state, shall never be taxed higher than the land belonging to the residents thereof; and that no taxes shall be imposed by said state on lands or property therein belonging to, or which may hereafter be purchased by, the United States, unless otherwise provided by the congress of the United States.
You employer needs to feed you some new info to post. That land was appropriated as open range and is the basis of Bundy’s claim. That is all.
Sorry but you are incorrect. That land has belonged to the US government since the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. The closest thing to “open range” was that period of time from the 1850’s till the passage of the Taylor Grazing Act in 1934 (before Bundy was born), when the US government did not enforce it’s rights to the land.
Once the grazing act was passed, Congress enforced it’s constitutional authority to determine how that land will be used and what fees were to be collected. Bundy paid those fees until 1993 when he did not like the terms that the land lord (Congress via the BLM) imposed as the legal owners of that land.
You claim the land was appropriated as open range. Show me where Congress appropriated that land as open range. What law or act of congress set aside that land as open range?
I will point out that if there was no appropriation as open range, then they are unappropriated public lands which is exactly what the state constitution says that “they forever disclaim all right and title to”