Supreme Court Rejects Utah's Attempt to Gain Control Over Federal Lands
The Supreme Court declined Utah's lawsuit to take control of 18.5 million acres of public land from federal agencies.
Summary
The Supreme Court has rejected Utah's lawsuit to gain control of over 18 million acres of public land, which constituted nearly half of federal land in the state. This marked a significant defeat for Utah's Republican officials who argued for state ownership to increase revenue and management control, as federal agencies oversee nearly 70% of the state’s land. Legal observers highlighted this decision as a reinforcement of federal authority over public lands, countering Utah's claims of unconstitutional land retention. The refusal to hear the case continues a century-long precedent in favor of federal land management.
Sources (3)
- The Supreme Court's decision is a significant win for public land management and upholds the constitutional authority of the federal government over public lands, preventing a misguided land grab by Utah.
- Opponents of the lawsuit, including conservation groups, argue that allowing states to control vast federal lands would disrupt more than a century of legal precedent and jeopardize public access to these lands.
- The rejection of this lawsuit is seen as a necessary move to keep public lands under federal stewardship, ensuring they remain accessible to all Americans.
HuffPost·4M· "…Even this staunchly conservative Supreme Court refused to take up Utah’s complaint, likely because it relies on a blatant misreading of the Constitution and would disrupt over a century of legal precedent and property law."