The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Utah's bid to gain control over millions of acres of federal land, dealing a blow to the state's efforts to assert greater authority over its natural resources.
Why It Matters
Federal agencies currently oversee nearly 70 percent of Utah's land, including areas crucial for energy production, mining, grazing and outdoor recreation. Utah officials have argued that state control would ensure better local governance and unlock revenue opportunities through taxation and development. However, the state's proposal excluded its iconic national parks and monuments from the transfer.
Utah's push for control highlights a broader debate over federal land management in the West, where sprawling landscapes often fall under the jurisdiction of agencies like the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Critics of federal oversight argue it limits economic potential, while supporters counter that it safeguards public lands for conservation and recreational use.
What To Know
In a brief order on Monday, the high court denied the Republican-led state's request to file a lawsuit aimed at transferring ownership of approximately half of Utah's federally managed land, an area comparable in size to South Carolina.
The Supreme Court, as is customary in such instances, provided no explanation for its decision, stating only that "the motion for leave to file a bill of complaint is denied."
The decision comes after Utah sued in August to try to gain control of 18.5 million acres that is held by the federal government.
The filing, which state leaders said was the result of "decades of legal analysis," targeted BLM land "unappropriated" to parks, monuments or other national sites.
According to The Salt Lake Tribune, Utah Governor Spencer Cox, Senate President Stuart Adams, House Speaker Mike Schultz and Attorney General Derek Brown said they were disappointed in the court's decision.
The federal Bureau of Land Management declined to comment to The Associated Press.
What People Are Saying
Republican Utah Governor Spencer Cox said in August: "Utah deserves priority when it comes to managing its land. It's been a tragedy to see what this administration and past administrations have done to our land, closing down roads that have been open for generations."
Cox, Senate President Stuart Adams, House Speaker Mike Schultz and Attorney General Derek Brown said in a statement to The Salt Lake Tribune: "We are also heartened to know the incoming [Trump] administration shares our commitments to the principle of 'multiple use' for these federal lands and is committed to working with us to improve land management. We will continue to fight to keep public lands in public hands because it is our stewardship, heritage and home."
Utah House Minority Leader Angela Romero, a Democrat, praised the Supreme Court's decision in a statement to The Salt Lake Tribune as a "win for all Americans and the protection of our environment. Today's actions serve as an important reminder that our public lands should not be privatized or exploited for short-term benefits."
What Happens Next
While it's unclear what state officials will do next, the state said in a statement to The Salt Lake Tribune that they "remain able and willing to challenge any BLM land management decisions that harm Utah."
This article includes reporting from The Associated Press.
English (US) ·