“All the arguments and conflicts on Bundy are resolved in the courtroom.”
Unfortunately, the courts often depend on the skill of the lawyers combined with the honor of the judge, and many judges have no honor. Try reading Sotomayer’s dissent in the Michigan EEO case...
In Bundy’s original court case, at least, Bundy represented himself, which is almost always a very bad idea.
In Bundy’s case, his legal theory that the federal government cannot own dry land is a legal fantasy. He would have been better off arguing, thru a lawyer, that the BLM was acting arbitrary and capricious - something the BLM does all the time. But then, Bundy would have to pay the lawyers, while the government had dozens provided for free at taxpayer expense.
Anyone who thinks a private individual sues a federal agency on equal footing is living in fantasy land!
That's why I suggested GilesB represent him in a new case. I haven't read all of them but if Giles says Bundy owns the grazing rights and is merely paying a management fee to BLM, that sounds like another legal avenue to pursue.