In a significant development, a group of dozens of House and Senate Republicans have filed a legal brief urging the Supreme Court to take up two cases related to President Biden’s authority to lock up public lands from resource development and other uses. Led by Rep. Cliff Bentz of Oregon, the lawmakers argue that Biden’s use of the 1906 Antiquities Act is an example of federal overreach and violates the U.S. Constitution.
The cases in question are American Forest Resource Council v. United States of America and Murphy Company v. Biden, which challenge the expansion of the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument in southwest Oregon. Plaintiffs argue that the monument expansion was both illegal and caused significant economic damage, particularly to the timber industry.
The Antiquities Act, designed as a federal conservation tool, grants the president broad authority to establish national monuments on existing federal lands. Since taking office, President Biden has established five such monuments, which have faced opposition from industry, lawmakers, and legal challenges.
Under separate legislation passed in the 1970s, Congress established the “multiple-use” and sustained yield mandate, requiring the Bureau of Land Management to open the lands it manages to various uses including energy development, drilling, grazing, recreation, and mining.
The lawmakers argue that the executive branch has abused the Antiquities Act for too long, cutting off millions of acres of public lands without considering the impact on rural communities or seeking local input. They emphasize that the president does not have the constitutional authority to lock away federal land and waters.
The Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument, the focus of the two cases, was designated in 2000 by former President Clinton and expanded in 2017 by former President Obama. Environmentalists have defended the designation and expansion, citing the protection of wildlife and plant species in the area.
However, the outcome of these cases will have wider ramifications for the future use of the Antiquities Act and national monuments created by President Biden. Other monuments, such as the Avi Kwa Ame National Monument in Nevada and Baaj Nwaavjo I’tah Kukveni National Monument in Arizona, have also faced opposition and legal challenges.
The American Forest Resource Council (AFRC) President Travis Joseph emphasizes the importance of these cases for the future management of federal lands, stating that the protection of democracy and constitutional processes are at stake.
The legal battles surrounding the Cascade-Siskiyou National Monument have seen conflicting rulings from lower courts. The AFRC initially succeeded in their lawsuit, arguing that the executive branch lacked the authority to override the will of Congress. However, subsequent appeals courts in D.C. and Seattle have upheld the monument expansion, rejecting the timber industry’s arguments.
This development adds to the ongoing debates over land use, conservation, and the balance between federal and local authority. It highlights the concerns raised by Republicans regarding President Biden’s climate change agenda and his approach to public land management.
It remains to be seen whether the Supreme Court will take up these cases and provide clarity on the executive branch’s authority in regulating federal lands and waters. This decision will have far-reaching implications for the future of land use policies in the United States.
