Eighteen Native and Conservation Organizations Sue to Block Monument Reductions That Shrunk Two Monuments by 90 Percent

A formidable coalition of eighteen Native American tribes, environmental advocacy groups, scientific organizations, and prominent outdoor industry businesses has launched a legal offensive against the federal government, seeking to overturn the Trump administration’s drastic reductions to Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monuments. The executive order, issued in July, slashed the protected acreage of both iconic Utah landscapes by a staggering 90 percent, igniting a legal battle that could reverberate across the nation and redefine the future of protected public lands.

The lawsuit, consolidated from multiple filings, asserts that the President exceeded his constitutional and statutory authority by unilaterally shrinking federally designated national monuments. Plaintiffs argue that the Antiquities Act, the very legislation used to establish these protected areas, does not grant the executive branch the power to diminish them. This legal challenge represents a critical stand against what many view as an unprecedented assault on conservation efforts and a betrayal of the public trust.

At the forefront of this legal fight are Native American organizations deeply connected to these ancestral lands. Utah Diné Bikéyah, representing the Navajo Nation, and the A’nuche, advocating for the Ute Mountain Ute and Southern Ute tribes, are central figures. These tribes were instrumental in the original designation of Bears Ears National Monument, a testament to their enduring stewardship and cultural heritage. The Native American Rights Fund (NARF) is spearheading the legal representation for several of these tribes, including the Hopi, Zuni, and Ute Mountain Ute tribes, along with the Navajo Nation and the Ute Tribe of the Uintah and Ouray Reservation.

Matthew Campbell, Deputy Director of NARF, articulated the gravity of the situation in an emailed statement. "These suits are an important step in the ongoing defense of these lands against efforts by this administration to irrevocably alter this sacred landscape," Campbell stated. He underscored the inherent rights of Tribal Nations, asserting, "It is Tribal Nations’ sovereign right to steward Tribal homelands." This legal action is not merely about land preservation; it is a defense of cultural identity, historical continuity, and indigenous sovereignty.

The roster of plaintiffs extends beyond Native American groups to include prominent conservation organizations such as the Sierra Club, the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA), and Defenders of Wildlife. These groups have a long history of advocating for the protection of wild places and have been instrumental in raising public awareness and supporting conservation initiatives. Their involvement signals a broad-based consensus on the importance of these natural and cultural treasures.

Scientific organizations, including the Center for Vertebrate Paleontology and Archeology Southwest, have also joined the legal fray. Their participation highlights the immense scientific and archeological value of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante. These areas are repositories of invaluable paleontological discoveries and ancient cultural sites, offering crucial insights into the history of life on Earth and the civilizations that once thrived in the region. The potential loss of these scientific resources due to reduced protection is a significant concern.

Adding considerable weight to the coalition is outdoor industry giant Patagonia. The company’s involvement underscores the economic and recreational importance of these public lands and reflects a commitment to environmental stewardship that aligns with its brand identity. Patagonia’s participation signals that the fight for public lands is not solely an environmental or tribal issue, but also a matter of economic and recreational interest for a significant segment of the American public.

Steve Bloch, Legal Director for SUWA, emphasized the unified front presented by this diverse group of plaintiffs. "The love of public lands unites so many different individuals and groups and interests. And that’s maybe no more so true than here," Bloch told Backpacker. He further elaborated, "I think what that says at the end of the day is we have tens of millions of Americans who, through these organizations, and through causes and businesses that they support, are rising up to say in a very loud voice, ‘we don’t intend to allow Trump’s attack on the monuments to be the final word.’" This statement powerfully captures the broad public sentiment and the deep-seated opposition to the administration’s actions.

This legal challenge is not a new battleground for many of these organizations. In 2017, the Trump administration initially reduced the boundaries of Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments. At that time, a similar coalition of groups filed lawsuits, arguing that the President lacked the authority to shrink congressionally or administratively designated national monuments under the Antiquities Act. Those legal proceedings were ongoing until 2021, when newly inaugurated President Joe Biden issued an executive order reversing the 2017 reductions, restoring the original monument boundaries. However, in a swift reversal, the White House once again reduced the monuments on July 13, prompting the plaintiffs to file motions to revive their previous legal challenges, now consolidated into a single, robust case.

The immediate aftermath of the monument reductions saw a rapid response from mining companies and prospectors eager to capitalize on the newly accessible lands. Within 24 hours of the initial announcement, claims began to be filed on the areas excised from the monuments, areas believed by some to hold significant uranium deposits. This opportunistic land grab has heightened concerns about the potential for destructive industrial activities in these ecologically and culturally sensitive areas.

Bloch expressed strong opposition to these mining claims, asserting their invalidity. He argued that the claims were filed preemptively, before the expiration of the monuments’ protections on September 11. SUWA has pledged to closely monitor the situation and challenge any new claims filed after the deadline. "We’ll be keeping a close eye on whether those individuals, those companies try to start to actually mine on the ground," Bloch stated. "Not only watching them, but I think we’ll be looking to challenge any kind of activity that happens." The legal strategy may involve challenging such activities in federal district court or through administrative processes with the Bureau of Land Management, depending on the specific circumstances.

The judicial process is expected to be lengthy and complex. The cases are likely to remain in procedural stages well into the following year. However, the ultimate outcome of these lawsuits could have profound implications for conservation policy across the United States. If the administration’s decision to shrink the monuments is upheld, it could set a dangerous precedent, potentially jeopardizing the status of hundreds of other national monuments.

"No monument is safe," Bloch warned, emphasizing the far-reaching consequences. "There are more than a hundred of these national monuments… scattered in almost all the states. Some very small, some landscape level, like the ones in Utah." The fate of these vast expanses of federal land, their invaluable natural resources, their untamed wildness, the sanctity of their cultural sites, and the unique flora and fauna they harbor, all hang in the balance of this critical legal contest.

The visual landscape of Bears Ears National Monument, characterized by dramatic rock formations like the iconic arch depicted, serves as a potent symbol of the natural beauty and cultural significance at stake. The designation of Bears Ears as a national monument in 2016 was a landmark achievement, a culmination of decades of advocacy by Native American tribes who consider the area sacred. The monument encompasses a vast expanse of rugged canyons, mesas, and forested highlands, teeming with archeological sites, including ancient dwellings, rock art, and ceremonial areas, as well as diverse wildlife and plant species.

Similarly, Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, established in 1996, is renowned for its dramatic geological formations, extensive fossil beds, and remote wilderness character. It protects a significant portion of Utah’s unique geological history, including some of the most important dinosaur fossil sites in the world. The reduction of these monuments not only threatens their ecological integrity and scientific value but also diminishes the cultural and spiritual connection that Native American tribes have maintained with these lands for millennia.

The legal arguments against the monument reductions are multifaceted. Plaintiffs contend that the Antiquities Act, enacted in 1906, grants the President the authority to "declare by public proclamation from time to time the areas of historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest that are situated upon the public lands of the United States to be national monuments." Crucially, the Act does not explicitly grant the President the power to revoke or diminish existing monument boundaries. This interpretation is central to the plaintiffs’ case, asserting that the administration has acted beyond its legal mandate.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs argue that the administration’s decision was arbitrary and capricious, lacking a rational basis and disregarding substantial evidence of the monuments’ ecological, cultural, and scientific significance. They point to the broad support for the monument designations from a wide array of stakeholders, including scientists, conservationists, local communities, and Native American tribes, as evidence that the reductions were not made in the public interest.

The political context surrounding these monument designations and reductions is also significant. National monuments have become a recurring point of contention in the ongoing debate over land management in the American West, often pitting environmental protection against resource extraction and development interests. The decision to shrink Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante reflects a broader trend of reevaluating federal land protections under certain administrations, highlighting the vulnerability of these designations to political shifts.

The legal battle ahead will undoubtedly be closely watched by conservationists, tribal nations, scientists, and the public at large. The outcome will not only determine the future of these two iconic Utah landscapes but could also set a critical precedent for the protection of national monuments nationwide, influencing how these irreplaceable natural and cultural resources are managed for generations to come. The strength and diversity of the coalition challenging the administration’s actions underscore the deep and widespread commitment to preserving America’s natural heritage.