|
The state of Utah announced a lawsuit that aims to seize control of more than 18 million acres of national public land in the state. The lawsuit, which several legal scholars said is baseless and unlikely to succeed, asks the U.S. Supreme Court to give the state ownership of what Utah calls "unappropriated" public lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management.
Bret Birdsong, a law professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, told E&E News that the property clause of the U.S. Constitution has long been interpreted “to provide Congress with essentially unlimited authority to determine the use or transfer of public lands.”
Professor Mark Squillace of the University of Colorado called the lawsuit “more a political stunt than anything else.” Squillace explained that the 1894 law granting Utah statehood included a promise that the state wouldn't make any claim on federal lands.
“This is directly contrary to what they agreed to when they became a state,” Squillace told the Associated Press. “The courts have made a more conservative turn, but I don’t think even this Supreme Court is likely to overcome the quite clear law and Constitutional provisions that would bar Utah from taking over public lands.”
Conservation groups, including the Center for Western Priorities, blasted the lawsuit as a waste of time and money.
“This lawsuit isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on,” said CWP Deputy Director Aaron Weiss. “Governor Cox and the state legislature need to make a U-turn before they waste millions of taxpayer dollars enriching out-of-state lawyers on this pointless lawsuit.”
|
There is room for Utah to work more effectively with the federal government on matters involving water, energy and natural resource management. Unfortunately, today’s lawsuit will only make responsible and collaborative stewardship more difficult.”
