Appeals Court Upholds Monuments' Legal Standing

By Cat Lazaroff

WASHINGTON, DC, October 21, 2002 (ENS) - A federal appeals court has rejected a property rights challenge to seven new national monuments created by President Bill Clinton in the waning days of his administration. But the groups that challenged Clinton's application of the 1906 Antiquities Act say they plan to take their case to the Supreme Court.

The Washington DC Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on two cases concerning national monuments created by President Clinton using his executive authority under the Antiquities Act, which gives the president power to establish national monuments to protect public lands with significant cultural, historic or natural values.

President Clinton announcing the creation of Grand Canyon-Parashant National Monument in January (Photo courtesy President's Council on Environmental Quality)

Mountain States challenged the authority of President Clinton, and all future presidents, to establish and protect national monuments when it first filed a lawsuit at the district court level. It claimed the Constitution gives such power only to the Congress.

The plaintiffs also claimed a president may create national monuments in order to protect only man made objects, not natural resources including unusual landscapes or rare species. Lawyers for the federal government and environmental groups argued that these claims have been rejected by the court in the past and therefore warranted dismissal, and the district court agreed.

The Sonoran Desert National Monument provides protection for giant saguaro cacti. (Photo courtesy National Park Service)

"That argument fails as a matter of law in light of Supreme Court precedent [authorizing] the president to designate the Grand Canyon and similar sites as national monuments," wrote the three judge panel of the appeals court, calling the property rights advocates claims a "bald assertion" presented without supportive evidence.

"Moreover, the court is necessarily sensitive to pleading requirements where, as here, it is asked to review the president's actions under a statute that confers very broad discretion on the president and separation of powers concerns are presented," the court added.

Desert bighorn sheep have one of their last strongholds in the new Ironwood Forest National Monument. (Photo courtesy Arizona Game and Fish Department)

The Antiquities Act has played a pivotal role in the protection of many unique American treasures, including the Grand Tetons, Death Valley, the Grand Canyon, and Zion and Denali National Parks. Protecting the natural jewels of the United States has been a bipartisan undertaking; since 1906, all but three presidents have made use of the Antiquities Act to protect the special qualities of federal lands from potential harm.

In a separate ruling, the court of appeals upheld the validity of the Giant Sequoia National Monument in California. Timber industry representatives, recreation groups and Tulare County, California challenged the creation of the monument, which is intended to protect some of the nation's largest, oldest and most majestic trees.

The new monument blocks logging on 328,000 acres in Sequoia National Forest. Tulare County, where most of those acres are located, will lose thousands of dollars in so called "county payments" - the portion of federal timber sale fees that is paid to the counties where the sales take place.

Giant sequoias are among the largest trees in the world. (Photo by Marion Matthews, courtesy Sequoia National Forest)

The monument's challengers argued that President Clinton's executive order failed to detail why the region warranted protection.

"Count 1 of Tulare County's complaint is premised on the assumption that the Antiquities Act requires the president to include a certain level of detail in the proclamation," including evidence of historical or prehistorical values, the appeals court wrote. "No such requirement exists."

Anasazi ruins like the Escalante Pueblo are typical of those found in Canyons of the Ancients National Monument. (Photo courtesy Bureau of Land Management)

"This is a glorious victory worthy of this magnificent monument," said Michael Sherwood, staff attorney for Earthjustice's Oakland office who represented environmental organizations in the Giant Sequoia National Monument case.

"The decision so thoroughly and convincingly rejects every one of the challenges to the Monument that it not only preserves this wonderful new national monument for the enjoyment of generations to come, but also preserves the right of future presidents to act to save environmentally, scenically, and historically important lands from the ravages of commercial timber harvest, mining, road building, and other destructive actions," added Sherwood.

The Hanford Reach provides critical spawning grounds for endangered salmon. (Photo courtesy American Rivers)

"I think the big difficulty with the court's decision is that it indicates the president has the power to achieve whatever environmental objective he wants through the Antiquities Act," William Perry Pendley, president of Mountain States Legal Foundation, told the Associated Press. "We think that's too broad a reading."