The lawsuit filed in federal court is attempting to revoke the 624,000-acre Chuckwalla National Memorial in the Southern California desert, claiming that President Biden stomped his authority aside a belt of such vast land before taking office.
The plaintiffs, represented by a conservative think tank based in Austin, Texas, abused the laws of 1906, where Biden could create ancient laws, and the president’s national monuments. The lawsuit filed against the Ministry of Home Affairs emphasizes that the law limits the monument to “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects being protected.”
“If you look at history, it should have been limited to 100 acres, perhaps 1,000 acres. But it certainly wasn’t the kind of expansion we’ve seen in recent years,” said Matt Miller, a senior lawyer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, who filed the lawsuit.
Supporters of Chuckwalla, located south of Joshua Tree National Park, point out that the president has been in use for a long time by the president, including the designation of the Grand Canyon by Theodore Roosevelt in 1908.
On May 1, the U.S. Department of Interior Foundation in Eastern District Court of Michigan, filed a mining request for Blueribbon Coalition, a nonprofit advocating for monument footprints and recreational access, and is the foundation of the state’s internal district court on behalf of state residents.
According to the lawsuit, Daniel Trongo, whose family began mining in the area in 1978 and members of the Blue Ribbon Union began mining in the area, is prevented from using the land in a way he previously enjoyed himself for the designation of the monument.
Trongo of Brighton, Michigan faces troublesome restrictions to maintain his claims and is unable to expand it as planned, potentially threatening his retirement plans, which involves increasing the time he has time to mine there with his family, according to the lawsuit.
“While Trongo and his family have invested time and money to gain claims, equipment and related knowledge, the dream of expanding operations beyond their current size is no longer possible,” Suit said.
Meanwhile, members of the Blue Ribbon Coalition, which include off-road bikers, are afraid to face restrictions due to “the goal of maintaining the undeveloped nature of the land.”
The Home Office has not yet responded to the lawsuit, and spokeswoman J. Elizabeth Peace said departmental policies should not comment on the lawsuit.
In a statement, she said, “I support the responsibility for the protection and management of the country’s natural and cultural resources, the responsibility for the trust of the tribes, and reaffirm our unwavering commitment to prioritizing the financial responsibility of the American people, whilst overseeing public lands and water for the benefit of all Americans.”
Janessa Goldbeck, chief executive of Vet Voice Foundation, a nonprofit that represents veterans, said the lawsuit makes many false claims.
“We have a Texas special interest group representing Michigan men who try to undo what Californians love and fight,” she said. “So I think it’s important for us to see what it is. This is an ideological attempt with special out-of-state benefits to sell public land here in California.”
Goldbeck, a former US Marine, pushed back the account of a military site case protected by designation, including a World War I training site that was established by General George Patton to prepare his troops to fight in the deserts of North Africa. The lawsuit reports that “all the rest of the facility is a tank truck and wreckage in a concrete fountain and rock laying passageway.”
According to Goldbeck, you can see the roads and foundations. She also has a chapel with a pulpit still standing.
“They were clearly not in the landscape,” she said. “They don’t understand why veterans and military families across the political spectrum come together to defend the creation of the Chuckwara National Monument.”
She added that the concept of recreation being hampered is equally untrue, adding that hiking, licensed hunting, camping and more are still permitted.
In his final week of his inauguration, Biden designated Chuckwalla along with Highlands National Monument, spanning more than 224,000 acres of untouched lakes and unique geological features near the Oregon border.
Even before the memorial was designated, there was fear that they could be rewind by the Trump administration.
During his first term, Trump stripped his protection from the sharp, Marine monuments off the coast of New England at two Utah monuments (bear ears and magnificent staircases – Escalante). Biden administration.
In early February, many thought it would open a door that could eliminate or reduce the monument. He directed his deputy secretary to “amend all withdrawn public lands, if necessary,” citing federal laws corresponding to laws that allow the president to create monuments.
The young California monument believed Trump was part of what he might try to undo the actions of his predecessor.
Then, a month later, the Trump administration caused confusion when the president hinted that he had retracted the orders of his predecessors and created Chuck Walla.
It is unclear whether the president has the authority to change the monuments and is hotly contested. The lawsuit challenging Trump’s previous monument cuts was still pending when Biden reversed them and the issues never resolved.
Miller, the lawyer who leads the recent lawsuit, said he believes the administration may not protect the lawsuit brought against it.
The lawsuit argues that the designation of Chuckwalla is an invalid use of ancient law, and that ancient law itself is unconstitutional.
Congress said it has the right to determine how federal property is being used and disposed of, citing what is known as the constitutional property clause. According to the lawsuit, Congress cannot grant that right to the administrative department.
If the plaintiffs win, the status of the monument at Chuckwalla would be invalidated, Miller said.
Either way, Miller said he believes the loser will appeal, and could end up in front of the Supreme Court. In 2021, the president implemented the bone-raw extension law, designated a vast memorial, informing the court that it could reconsider the law in future cases.
“If it goes up, I hope this is the case,” Miller said.
