American Lands Council
Did You Know...  
the Transfer of Public Lands Act is not just another "Sagebrush Rebellion"!
 

Aug. 21, 2013
Quick Links
 

This Week's Challenge:
  • Watch the video below and discover how the states East of Colorado compelled the federal government to dispose of their lands as was promised.
  • Continue to share the White Paper and its Summary with someone you haven't shared it with yet and ask them to give you their feedback.
  • Why did the states EAST of Colorado succeed in getting the federal government to honor its promise?
    Why did the states EAST of Colorado succeed in getting the federal government to honor its promise?

    Did You Know ...

    the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that federal commitments made to the sovereign states at the time of their entry into the Union are serious and enforceable.

    Please share this White Paper
    by Dr. Donald J. Kochan



    Greetings!

    Although some have called the Transfer of Public Lands Act (TPLA) a "new Sagebrush Rebellion," the nature of the TPLA is different from measures that have come before it and the new law involves some very unique legal concerns.  

    As Professor Kochan points out in his White Paper on Utah's HB148, "A contract-based theory - including a compact-based duty to dispose - is one of the strongest arguments that proponents of the TPLA make to support the validity of Utah's demand. The argument includes claims that the TPLA simply enforces a promise made

    when Utah became a state that the federal government has heretofore seemed unwilling to completely honor and fulfill.

     

    "The legal rules for construction of written instruments requires that the UEA (Utah Enabling Act) is read and interpreted as a whole document to give effect to the full bargain struck in the agreement.  Longstanding precedents support the theory that the UEA is a bilateral compact that should be treated like it is, and interpreted as, a binding contractual agreement.  For one thing, the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently held that federal commitments made to the sovereign states at the time of their entry into the Union are serious and enforceable.

     

    "Furthermore, as the U.S. Supreme Court explained in Andrus v. Utah, promises in Enabling Acts are "'solemn agreement[s]' which in some ways may be analogized to a contract between private parties." ... the agreements within Utah's Enabling Act and others like it "were solemn bilateral compacts between each State and the Federal Government." Powell later in his opinion further describes the "bilateral" nature of the compact.  ...  Both parties had corresponding rights and duties.

     

    "Moreover, in Andrus, the U.S. Supreme Court also recognized that these compacts anticipate remedies for breach - even against the federal government if it fails to perform duties arising under the compact."

     

    Can you understand why it is so imperative that we understand our history and our laws if we are to maintain the sovereignty of our states?  For this reason, we continue to ask you to send the  White Paper, commissioned by the Federalist Society, to all of your county, city and state attorneys, legal advisors and government affairs personnel, as well as your elected officials and ask for their review, commentary and feedback. 

     

    Federalist Society White Paper

    Executive Summary of Federalist Society White Paper

     

    Thank you for your willingness to stand.

     

    Sincerely, 

      

    Ken Ivory

    ALC President

      

    P.S. Click here to discover how you can stand with the American Lands Council, and help this work move forward.   

    Donate