Under the leadership of Mayor Logan Monson, Blanding City in Utah has bravely inserted itself into a major legal challenge against overreach from the federal government. Rooted in the serene landscape of San Juan County, Blanding represents not just a community, but a symbol of the American ideal, where the stewardship of land and water—essential threads in the fabric of its founding—is cherished and fiercely guarded.
The Biden Administration’s decision to impose federal control on new land in Utah—by re-expanding the Bears Ears National Monument area—blatantly undermines Blanding’s right to self-determination, striking at the heart of the community’s ability to sustain its people and preserve its culture. This is not merely a legal dispute—it is a battle for the survival of a town’s soul, where the balance between fostering tourism and upholding the needs of the residents is being threatened by a monstrous federal decree. But this case is not just about Blanding. It has broader implications for the Constitution, and for the balance of power between the federal government and local governments.
Case Background
The legal question revolves around the interpretation and application of the Antiquities Act of 1906, a federal law in which Congress delegated to the president the authority to declare historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest on federal lands as national monuments. The designation of an area as a “monument” cuts off the public’s ability to use the lands covered by the designation. Put simply, it is a dangerous tool that the federal government should rarely use.
The Antiquities Act specifies that the president may designate certain areas only by limiting the designation to the “smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” But that language has not slowed down the takeover of local lands from Washington. Sadly, presidents have stretched the Act far beyond its intended meaning on thinner and thinner legal ice, to the point where presidents take millions of acres of land away from local control, without even consulting with local interests or explaining why they can do it.
And that is what is happening in Utah. In this case, President Biden’s designation of over 3.23 million acres for Bears Ears and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments is a misuse of presidential power, effectively turning vast landscapes into untouchable “national monuments,” even though the areas are supposed to be subject to local control. The Act was meant to protect specific historical sites, and to only wall off the “smallest area” necessary to protect those sites. It was not meant to impose broad land-use restrictions over large areas in a way that interferes with local governance and resource management.
Ineffective Courts
The problem is made worse by the decisions of federal courts to dismiss challenges to monument designations before a case can ever really begin.
For example, the district court refused to hear the case brought by the State of Utah and several counties. But the court’s reasoning was confusing:
- The court said it could not hear the case because it was impossible to apply the Antiquities Act without guidance from Congress or a higher court, and so it could not interpret the meaning of the “smallest area” as a limit on the president’s power. But it is precisely the court’s job to interpret the law, regardless of whether it’s been interpreted before!
- The Court said that because the president has the authority to designate areas as monuments that such authority can never be challenged, even if it is definitely misused! But that logic would enable the president to designate anywhere and anything a monument, regardless of size or scope. With a government of limited powers, how can that be?
This practice closes the courthouse doors to those affected by the president’s designations before they can even try to present their case. Such dismissals deny parties like Blanding City their day in court.
The courts are abandoning their duty to strictly interpret the law and the limitations directly imposed by Congress on the president in the Antiquities Act, and they are overly deferring to the president’s misuse of this dangerous federal tool without sufficient scrutiny. Instead, the courts should play their critical and constitutional role as a check on presidential action, especially when it has significant implications for the sovereignty and self-determination of local governments.
Join the Fight
Since 1977, MSLF has fought to protect private property rights, individual liberties, and economic freedom. MSLF is a nonprofit public interest legal foundation. We represent clients pro bono and receive no government funding. Make your 100% tax deductible contribution today and join the fight.
What’s at Stake
The impact of this case extends beyond Blanding. It touches on the very structure of the Constitution. When courts simply dismiss cases prematurely, it undermines the role of the judiciary to apply the written law in response to an overreaching executive. That is why Blanding wrote separately to the appeals court, in support of the other local entities fighting President Biden’s designations. The district courts must stem the tide of federal encroachment that drowns out the voices of local communities.
We stand with Blanding in asking the appeals court to reverse the district court’s ruling, so that local communities at least have a chance to push back!
A ruling in our favor will benefit not only Blanding, but also set a precedent for other communities facing similar challenges.
June 2024 Case Update
BLM is at it again, this time they are trying to implement a draft resource management plan (RMP) in the Bears Ears National Monument planning area. This draft RMP serves as the first step in the regulatory process for BLM. However, the proposal fails to communicate vital information to the public that precludes meaningful review and comment on several issues. This violates the regulatory procedure provided for in NEPA and is, therefore, unreasonable under the APA. The several issues involve: livestock grazing, off-highway-vehicle use and dispersed camping, recreational shooting, the bears ears coalition and proposed road closures.
In addition, BLM attempts to hide behind President Biden’s Proclamation under the Antiquities Act by asserting that the proclamation supersedes FLPMA through an exception and therefore they should not have to analyze an alternative consistent with FLPMA’s multiple use and sustained yield mandate within the draft RMP. However, it then proceeds to attempt to manage the land under other parts of FLPMA by continuing to designate large swathes of land as ACECs (Areas of Critical Environmental Concern) that potentially stand to harm Blanding City by preventing them from maintaining, improving or even repairing existing infrastructure within the bounds of the ACECs.
Blanding City might lose even more through the loss of Trust Land revenue that is gained through the State of Utah’s careful management of the land. The revenue is used to help the Utah Public School System and make meaningful improvements to such systems within communities like Blanding City. The fact that BLM continues to encroach upon Utah lands that ought to be used to benefit Utahn’s is a testament to how far they are willing to go. This cannot stand.