Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Utah plans to take US land through eminent domain
Business Week ^ | March 10, 2010 | BROCK VERGAKIS

Posted on 03/10/2010 11:52:14 AM PST by Willie Green

Utah lawmakers angry over federal ownership of land in the state approved the use of eminent domain Tuesday to take some of the most valuable parcels.

The goal is to spark a U.S. Supreme Court battle that legislators' own attorneys acknowledge has little chance of success.

But Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and other Republicans say the case is still worth fighting because if the state wins it could reap millions of dollars for state schools each year.

More than 60 percent of Utah is owned by the U.S. government, and policy makers here have long complained that federal ownership hinders their ability to generate tax revenue and adequately fund public schools.

Utah spends less per student than any other state and has the nation's largest class sizes.

"Access to these lands will unlock billions of dollars for our kids," said Sen. Dan Liljenquist, R-Bountiful. "This is our own land that we can't get access to because of an unreasonable federal government."

(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: 10thamendment; coal; donttreadonme; eminentdomain; lping; oil; statesrights
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-99 next last

1 posted on 03/10/2010 11:52:14 AM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Good news, glad to see someone standing up to them. Can’t wait to see the FedGov’s reaction.


2 posted on 03/10/2010 11:55:08 AM PST by ravingnutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
I seem to remember that, years ago, someone stood up to the Fed Gov owning and controlling public land. It seems like it was Idaho.

They asked for the Feds to provide documentation showing where they got the authority. ...and they couldn't do it, IIRC.

Anyone have more info on that, or am I imagining things?

3 posted on 03/10/2010 11:57:13 AM PST by TChris ("Hello", the politician lied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Good it stand up to the Feds. Bad to push more “underfunded public schools” propaganda. Utah school districts spend more on administrative staff than teachers.


4 posted on 03/10/2010 11:58:34 AM PST by Seruzawa (If you agree with the French raise your hand - If you are French raise both hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

OVERDUE!

Once we get state legislators that have a pair, we can then work on the fed to abolish the EPA and Dept of the Interior.

Enough! of federal dithering in the states.


5 posted on 03/10/2010 11:58:44 AM PST by 13Sisters76 ("It is amazing how many people mistake a certain hip snideness for sophistication. " Thos. Sowell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
States taking Federal land doesn't usually end well. A dispute over the ownership of Fort Sumter comes to mind. Remember the stats seceded and everyone was still trying to negotiate. It was when they grabbed the federal land in those states that the shooting started. The people in Utah better be ready for the hornets nest they are about to kick over with this.
6 posted on 03/10/2010 11:59:54 AM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 13Sisters76
Once we get state legislators that have a pair, we can then work on the fed to abolish the EPA and Dept of the Interior.

Then work on the entirety of the IRS and the DEA.

7 posted on 03/10/2010 12:01:04 PM PST by wastedyears (The essence of training is to allow error without consequence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Those who wrote our Constitution never envisioned that the federal government they created would actually steal from the states like this is.

The states have the sovereign rights, not the feds.


8 posted on 03/10/2010 12:02:40 PM PST by bestintxas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter

Article 1, section 8 next to the last paragraph lays out the feds authority vis a vis land grabbing. They have, as always, badly overstepped their authority.


9 posted on 03/10/2010 12:05:21 PM PST by Scotsman will be Free (11C - Indirect fire, infantry - High angle hell - We will bring you, FIRE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Scotsman will be Free

Ironically, the Kelo decision may be the precedent.


10 posted on 03/10/2010 12:07:45 PM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Ping


11 posted on 03/10/2010 12:08:48 PM PST by EdReform (Oath Keepers - Guardians of the Republic - Honor your oath - Join us: www.oathkeepers.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Great move for Utah and damn glad to read you’re posts back on FR.


12 posted on 03/10/2010 12:09:14 PM PST by Eagles2003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eagles2003

Thank-you!


13 posted on 03/10/2010 12:10:31 PM PST by Willie Green
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Are these the lands that the b*****d Clinton took by executive order as he was leaving office? His last fU to conservatives?


14 posted on 03/10/2010 12:12:17 PM PST by Chickensoup (We have the government we deserve. Is our government our traitor?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

HUMMMM, like the sound of this one.


15 posted on 03/10/2010 12:14:30 PM PST by Marty62 (former Marty60)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chickensoup

The national monument with the sulfur free coal is, yes. That was tied to the Riady case, with an Indonesian business man funnelling money to Clinton’s campaign - and while the federal government mandates sulfur free coal use, locks up the largest undeveloped deposit in the United States in a no-mining national “monument”.


16 posted on 03/10/2010 12:14:34 PM PST by tbw2 (Freeper sci-fi - "Humanity's Edge" - on amazon.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

And while you are at it the BATF.....Declare sovereignty and keep all your money at home. Just think what the states could be if they cut the tax rates and kept all the money in the states...............


17 posted on 03/10/2010 12:18:09 PM PST by Concho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green; Congressman Billybob

Utah should win.

I would hope.


18 posted on 03/10/2010 12:20:36 PM PST by GeronL (I Own Me (yep, boiled down to 6 letters))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

And WTF does the fed gubmint do with their trillions of acres of land? Anything? Does it just sit there and is it unpopulated or not farmed or used for grazing, or anything? We know for sure that pantywaist liberals who have never been outside their cities or condos or mansions, have never even stepped foot in any natural wild setting.


19 posted on 03/10/2010 12:26:33 PM PST by rcrngroup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

Whoohoo Utah!


20 posted on 03/10/2010 12:27:35 PM PST by Falcon28 (Allen West - 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP
States taking Federal land doesn't usually end well. A dispute over the ownership of Fort Sumter comes to mind. Remember the stats seceded and everyone was still trying to negotiate. It was when they grabbed the federal land in those states that the shooting started. The people in Utah better be ready for the hornets nest they are about to kick over with this.

That was then..... this is now. People & state governments are now sick & tired of the massive uncontrolled overreaching by the fed gubmint. I think we need some states to just stand up and declare the feds have no ownership of lands in those states...and dare the feds to do something about it.

I think the feds will see & experience the hornets nest they kick up with this.

21 posted on 03/10/2010 12:29:55 PM PST by rcrngroup
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

YES! Harrass the Feds in every way you possibly can, including ticketing all of the mail trucks that are double-parked on Utah streets.


22 posted on 03/10/2010 12:32:24 PM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rcrngroup
And WTF does the fed gubmint do with their trillions of acres of land? Anything?

It is home to illegal alien marijuana farms. The feds won't deal with it because the drug dealers will shoot back.

23 posted on 03/10/2010 12:32:33 PM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: rcrngroup

Most of the USSA will become wilderness again. The one world orderers have already signed the treaties. All they have to do now is kill off about 60% of the population.

Coming soon to your neighborhood.


24 posted on 03/10/2010 12:33:26 PM PST by winodog (We've got more people voting for a living than we do working for a living.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

Ironically, the Kelo decision may be the precedent.

Then seize the IRS offices in Salt Lake and tear them down to build a Chuck E Cheese (since you can easily prove it will be of more economic benefit to the community)


25 posted on 03/10/2010 12:34:07 PM PST by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
Ooh! I like your thinking!

I'd add the BLM to the Kelo list, along with the IRS.

26 posted on 03/10/2010 12:36:02 PM PST by TChris ("Hello", the politician lied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Once we get state legislators that have a pair, we can then work on the fed to abolish the EPA and Dept of the Interior.

Then work on the entirety of the IRS and the DEA.


You left out half of the Alphabet departments starting with BATF.
Oh, what a wonderful world it would be if the Libtards in Washington lost their insulation and had to cope with constituents.


27 posted on 03/10/2010 12:36:40 PM PST by Steamburg (The contents of your wallet is the only language Politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

NICE! I hope Utah wins, this would go a very long way towards both undermine liberals eminent domain position, and the abuse of Federal authority.

In fact we should probably have a class action suit against the federal government. Most Western States have this problem, some more then others. In fact one of the main drivers for the Alaskan independence movement is exactly this problem.

In the western states excluding Texas(owned all its lands from the start due to being its own county) the Feds have basically been hording everything:

http://www.brianhayes.com/images/map-federal-land.jpg

Expect Alaska and a lot of other western State to follow suit.

The United States Federal Government should not be just siting on land, and using it to harass our States. it should in fact be selling off this land to lower our dept.
Instead Washington Bureaucrats in D.C. are hording it as a lever of control over our States.

Most of the effect of environmental regulations for example are owed to the existents of federal land and the “possible” impact on such land.

Article 6 section 2 of the United states Constitution, the so called “supremacy clause” speaks only of laws and treaty’s not property.

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

This does not make Federal property above that of state law.
Unless you should argue that such land is not under the solvently of the State, and is in fact a federal territory, like that of the district of Columbia.

A fact disputed by the cession of such rights in the addition and recolonization of statehood of such said state.

Nor should the so called supremacy clause make Federal government property superior to State laws.

Make the Federal employees in black robes choose what they want to believe.

We shall hold them in contempt of the laws of the United states, and the treaty of statehood, should they choose to refuses to recognize the sovereignty authority of our state, as already irreversibly recognized by the united states in our admission to Statehood.

After they have been given the chance to do the right thing, and choose to ignore their oath to up hold our Constitution’s recolonization of our solvently, we should take control of the land anyway.

The United States Constitution does not belong to the Federal court to redefine, but rather the Federal court belongs to the Constitution of the United States and its empowers the people and States of the United States to uphold and defend, just like all the other Oath taking party’s.

Should the court in this act CHOOSE to ignore its responsibility, in the upholding of that constitution, the responsibility still exist in the State legislators and in the congress.

This is the propose of checks and balances so that no one man or group of men may unilaterally hold absolute and thus unlawful power, but rather such solvent authority may be preserved closest to the individual people form whence it came.

To allow any one central authority such as the Federal court to negate its duty to uphold the constitution be the final word on the enforcement and upholding of such a constitution is to spell the end of that constitution as a law, and the beginning of the rule of men of that distant and centerline court rather then the rule of law.

This can NEVER be premised in a free Constitution of civil republican government!


28 posted on 03/10/2010 12:38:11 PM PST by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

They’re using courts, not cannon.

All things considered, Lawyers may be more effective.


29 posted on 03/10/2010 12:41:34 PM PST by Little Ray (The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray
All things considered, Lawyers may be more effective.

Slower, but usually more effective in the long run. The point is to keep it in the public mind until you get a Conservative (Note not a Republican) in the Whitehouse. Then cut some kind of deal where the feds cannot create a national monument without the approval of the state from which the land will be taken.
30 posted on 03/10/2010 12:48:43 PM PST by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ravingnutter
Can’t wait to see the FedGov’s reaction.

Likely the same as with Masa, a naked Rahm in the gym showers.


31 posted on 03/10/2010 12:50:07 PM PST by GalaxieFiveHundred
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
Here in Alaska, only 2% of our land mass is in public hands. People here still believe the word Carter is a foul, vile word.

Back at statehood, the fed's imported thousands of military, changed the residency law to throw the election. Most Alaskans wanted to remain a territory as no economic base; they knew they couldn't afford state government and taxes would explode due to statehood, which they did. AIP mainly wanted a true referendum to see if Alaskans wanted statehood, territory status, or remain like Philpines or P.R.

32 posted on 03/10/2010 12:50:16 PM PST by Eska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Concho

The BATFE is a branch of the IRS.

Alcohol, tobacco and firearms I think are all taxed beginning at the federal level, so they fall under the jurisdiction of the IRS.


33 posted on 03/10/2010 12:54:22 PM PST by wastedyears (The essence of training is to allow error without consequence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg

See my post 33.


34 posted on 03/10/2010 12:55:16 PM PST by wastedyears (The essence of training is to allow error without consequence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green

When I was a kid back in the 60’s, I was taught that the only land actually owned by the Federal Government were the military installations, federal labs and manufacturing sites, Government buildings, etc.

All the other lands belonged to all of the citizens, hence they were called Public Lands, and were only administered by the Feds at the will of the Public.

These Public Lands were open to various kinds of claims (mining,logging,ranching,etc.) and homesteading, patenting, in order to provide a fair and good use to the Public and prevent monopolizing of the lands by the few powerfull people, corporations and the government itself.

So when did the Federal Government buy all of these Public Lands from the Citizens of the United States and make them Federal Lands(Property)?

James


35 posted on 03/10/2010 1:07:11 PM PST by tradergem (Frustrated and Pissed Off Beyond All Reason With Liberals!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tbw2

Grande Staircase Escalante National Monument locked up one of the largest 3 low sulfur coal deposits in the world - it may be the largest. The other two are in Indonesia and Brazil. Clinton locked it up just as it was ready to be exploited. I’m told utilities in Florida have to import Indonesian low sulphur coal to meet EPA requirements - enriching Raidy and the Chinese military. Those lands in Utah were laid out in a grid with the proceeds from the mineral deposits going to support their school system.


36 posted on 03/10/2010 1:21:32 PM PST by OrioleFan (Republicans believe every day is the 4th of July, democrats believe every day is April 15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
It is a very interesting question. I am not aware of any decision of the Supreme Court on the use of eminent domain against federal property. The case of McCulloch vs. Maryland, written by John Marshall, said that Md. could not tax any of the assets of the new Bank of America, which was located in Md.

In that case, Marshall wrote the memorable line, "The power to tax is the power to destroy." That case is why most commentators believe that this Utah effort will fail, though I could construct a logical argument why Utah should prevail.

Congressman Billybob

Don't Tread On Me (9/12 photo and poster"

""I Was in the First Wave'"

37 posted on 03/10/2010 1:45:40 PM PST by Congressman Billybob (www.TheseAretheTimes.us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: winodog
The one world orderers have already signed the treaties.

World Heritage Sites, are controlled by the UN already.

38 posted on 03/10/2010 1:58:25 PM PST by itsahoot (Each generation takes to excess, what the previous generation accepted in moderation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

Something to keep an eye on.


39 posted on 03/10/2010 2:04:27 PM PST by GeronL (I Own Me (yep, boiled down to 6 letters))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Creative way to push back against the Behemoth. Worth a try, at least it makes a statement.
40 posted on 03/10/2010 2:08:26 PM PST by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

Wait a minute... there might be legal precedent. Of course! Land-snatching! Land, land... "Land: see Snatch." Ah, Haley vs. United States. Haley: 7, United States: nothing. You see, it can be done!

41 posted on 03/10/2010 2:10:29 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
State Sovereignty BUMP.

Go Utah!

42 posted on 03/10/2010 2:11:46 PM PST by SharpRightTurn (White, black, and red all over--America's affirmative action, metrosexual president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eska

You will get no sympathy from me on the issue of wanting to retain Territorial status to be exempted from sharing the burden of Taxes. Territorial status is suppose to be temporary for good reason.

its not fair to us who have to pay the cost of protecting you with no return, while its not fair to you who then have to be ruled with out representation.

You shouldn’t have to put up with the level of federal control you now have to put up with. Alaska like all the other states should be a lot more self-determining almost the execution of all other things when it comes to domestic matters.

This land issue is a very big part of that, as the Federally owned land is the most major part of the Federal government’s “legal levers of control” over your state.

If we can just either break the idea that the Federal government has supremacy over state laws with regard to Federal property in unceded areas of the State, You will be able to rebuild your control and autonomy.

Thats the crux of what Utah is trying to do. Alaska and all other States should do everything with in our power to help, because this is about our rights as much as it is about that of Utah’s.

PS: When you achieved Statehood, your State was given ownership of part not all of the State lands, as a result your State choose the land that had the most Oil and reduces in it, in order to open it up for exploration. (something Washington D.C. was still then largely closed to.)

In short Alaska benefited wildly form Statehood, as it gave you the ability to separately govern yourself and so such things with your own land. Much more free of Washington D.C>
The thing you need to remember about territorial status is such puts you under the unlimited thump of Washington D.C. You don’t get to have your own government or laws if Washington D.C. in anyway agrees.

Its true D.C. has been trying increasingly successfully to force all the existing states into a defacto territorial status in terms of the extent of its power, but its still NO where near as bad as actual territories.

The only reason Washington D.C. is treating PR and other territories so well, is because of international obligations we have to let them leave the union if they want to.

In other-words the Feds actually have to be concerned about the consent of the governed. Something very important to keeping government in check which we lost in 1861 thanks to the Tyrant Lincoln.


43 posted on 03/10/2010 3:20:09 PM PST by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: TChris

I remember what I believe was called the Jarbridge shovel brigade, that took back a county park that was in the process of being annexed by the feds.


44 posted on 03/10/2010 4:39:15 PM PST by nomad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nomad

As of January 4, 1896, the Fate of the people and state(territory) of Utah is now permanently and irreversibly in the hands of the Utahan.

Indeed their statehood was delayed for quite a long time because of fears that they would introduce the practice polygamy.


45 posted on 03/10/2010 6:59:36 PM PST by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Perfect!


46 posted on 03/10/2010 7:02:58 PM PST by bmwcyle (Free the Navy Seals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: wastedyears

Kinda sorta, they are all branches of the Treasury Dept.


47 posted on 03/10/2010 7:43:42 PM PST by Concho
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Monorprise
A friend who just passed on last fall (95 years old) homesteaded his place in 1942. He told me stories about statehood and prior that would make your hair stand up.

We all can quote this and that, but in the end it all comes down to what the people accept I guess. Also figures lie and liars figure.

Actually, it's a slow process (feds taking over).

You also need to look into the oil split, how it was changed, and how the feds have benefited. Always remember, the sale of Alaska was a lease on trading & economic rights with Russia. Why Russia always claims they will take her back; which will never happen either.

Ak is becoming more like the USA everyday; just not as far down the line as lower 48.

I'm not complaining though. We don't have state sales, income, or local prop taxes. In my community, no organized govt, no law enforcement for 200 miles, no ordinances, no comp planning, ect ect. Translates to so much more freedom than you have ever experienced it's not funny.

48 posted on 03/10/2010 7:48:31 PM PST by Eska
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: nomad
I remember what I believe was called the Jarbridge shovel brigade, that took back a county park that was in the process of being annexed by the feds.

As of January 4, 1896, the Fate of the people and state(territory) of Utah is now permanently and irreversibly in the hands of the Utahan.

Indeed their statehood was delayed for quite a long time because of fears that they would introduce the practice polygamy.

I'm very interested in Elko County now.

49 posted on 03/10/2010 8:48:25 PM PST by wastedyears (The essence of training is to allow error without consequence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: 11th Commandment; 17th Miss Regt; 2001convSVT; 2ndDivisionVet; A_Former_Democrat; ...
Thanks EdReform! This one bears watching.

Utah laying claim to Utah land held by the feral government!





Please ~ping~ me to articles relating to the 10th Amendment/States Rights so I can engage the pinger.

I've stopped monitoring threads and unilaterally adding names to the ping list, so if you want on or off the list just say so.

Additional Resources:

Tenth Amendment Chronicles Thread
Tenth Amendment Center
The Right Side of Life/State Initiatives
Sovereign States
Firearms Freedom Act

CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES

50 posted on 03/10/2010 11:58:28 PM PST by ForGod'sSake (You have two choices and two choices only: SUBMIT or RESIST with everything you've got!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-99 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson