“If the bureaucrats at the BLM can get a valid eviction order from the court, then they should get the county sheriff to serve it.”
They have a court order. The sheriff normally does not evict cattle from public land.
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy is permanently enjoined from trespassing on the New Trespass Lands.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to protect the New Trespass Lands against this trespass, and all future trespasses by Bundy.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy shall remove his livestock from the New Trespass Lands within 45 days of the date hereof, and that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days of the date hereof.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle for any future trespasses, [*8] provided the United States has provided notice to Bundy under the governing regulations of the United States Department of the Interior.
DATED this 9th day of July, 2013.”
Please notice the court orders says the UNITED STATES is entitled to “seize and remove”.
If property rights mean anything, then someone running cattle on someone else’s property is trespassing.
I’m no fan of the BLM. They are worse than the USFS, and the USFS has turned into an enviro-wackie organization. And yes, CONGRESS should address these issues. But if we support the US Constitution, and the USA, then we ARE citizens of the USA & Congress can make laws and enforce them if it does so IAW the US Constitution.
Well, it’s been my understanding that the county sheriff is responsible for serving eviction orders and that the feds do not have jurisdiction is such local matters. Maybe I’m all wet.
......I read your post with interest and would only add the observation that just because the particular court you cite (on that particular order written by some lawyer of one side or the other) signed the order doesn’t make any of it LEGALLY Right or correct.
Mr. Bundy is simply out of money to pay lawyers. PERIOD. Throw some more money to Bundy’s side and they would shred that order on appeal for years and then if the Feds lose they ignore the court order anyway. The lawlessness of the Obama Administration IS the issue.
Anyway, as I said, the Feds never follow court orders anyway, ergo why should mere citizens?
So this guy cannot run cattle on King Barack's land? Or does the land belong to the People of these United States? Should a hiker pay to walk the desert, or to burn King Barack's wood in a campfire?
Go for a weekend hike across this land. If you go a few miles you may see a few cows grazing. Grazing cows eat grass and poop. The poop makes the land richer, so it grows more grass. In the eastern US they speak of how many cows can an acre support. Out here it is dozens or hundreds of acres to support one cow.
Mr. Bundy renued his lease several times, who was the check made out to?
From the founding of the Bundy Ranch in 1876 until 1946, the Bundy cattle grazed around the ranch in the desert, because no one else lived there or cared, or did not want to spend the capital to acquire cattle and manage them as the Bundy’s were doing. Ranching is hard work.
In 1946, the BLM was founded. Sometime between its founding and 1993 they started to charge ranchers rent per cow on land that belonged to the USA. Now, back then, say in the late 19th Century Early 20th Century, desert land was considered worthless, unless there were minerals on it, or had a stream/creek/river that could be dammed. But that area around Bundy’s land was pretty worthless then.
In 1993, the BLM told the Bundy family that they could NOT freely graze as many cattle on “their” land as they used to (and paid the privilege for), but rather the BLM would allow NO MORE than 150 cattle to graze that land. Bundy, seeing how this would ruin him, objected. And the rest has been an ongoing legal matter since, with him refusing to “only” keep 150 cows on it, and the BLM racking up fines on him for doing so.
What was the reason for BLM’s decision back in 1993, to limit the Bundy Ranch to only 150 cows? The Desert Tortoise, who the environmentalists declared endangered by the cattle. Even that is a lie. The problem with these environmental laws is you cannot win against them. Judges ALWAYS rule for the government/greenies/environmentalists.
So you might see a kook who is trespassing, but I see an American, who, by the Grace of God go you or I, being ruined financially over some bureaucratic pencil pusher enamored by romantic save the whales types.
And one more thing. YOU call it trespass, yet the Bundy Ranch was there from 1876. Sure it was US land (as all the West was then), but we admired and encouraged settlers then. Now we kick them to the curb, because they're so-called despoilers of Mother Nature. And the kick of the government is deadly and powerful. Conservatives SHOULD support him.