“what if Nevada (and Wyoming, Arizona, etc) decide to reclaim the “public” land within their state? it’s not like the gum’ment is gonna evict a state.”
What they do is go to court, and the court would then ignore the state because those issues have already been before the courts - going back into the 1800s - and the courts have consistently handled them the same way. It would take an appeal to the US Supreme Court, which would have to overturn nearly 200 years of precedence in favor of giving the states much stronger rights than they have been held to have for the last 200 years.
Is that going to happen? Nope. The state would lose.
I’m as dumb as lemons when it comes to law and such, but may I ask your opinion one more thing?
In 1864 Nevada became a state, and I understand the conditions in “The Ordinance”, but in 1866 northern Arizona territory was shaved south down to the Colorado River and given to Nevada (to punish Arizona for siding with the Confederates). This new territory included most of Clark County. If the new state was given that new land by the feds, and this was outside of the original conditions for statehood, i.e., “all undistributed public lands would be retained by the federal government and could never be taxed by the state. These provisions would be “irrevocable” without the consent of Congress and of the people of Nevada,” wouldn’t Nevada then own Clark County and not the feds?