Loading your audio article
President Joe Biden exceeded his authority by creating the Chuckwalla National Monument, alleges a lawsuit that challenges the legitimacy of the monument in the Riverside County desert.
Attorneys for the Texas Public Policy Foundation filed the suit in federal court in Michigan on behalf of a Michigan man whose family holds mining rights in the monument area and a nonprofit organization dedicated to protecting recreational access to public lands.
RELATED: Can President Donald Trump erase Chuckwalla National Monument?
The plaintiffs are asking the court to reverse Biden’s January decision establishing the monument, which protects roughly 740,000 acres of wilderness from mining and development.
“The Chuckwalla National Monument is illegal and unconstitutional,” foundation Senior Attorney Matt Miller said in a news release.
He added that presidents Biden, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama have used the Antiquities Act of 1906 “to close millions of acres of public land at the stroke of a pen. Either this is an abuse of the Antiquities Act or the Antiquities Act is itself an unconstitutional delegation of Congress’s power to the executive branch.”
The Protect California Deserts Coalition, which consists of Native American tribes and others who support Chuckwalla, said in an emailed statement that it is reviewing the lawsuit.
“There is broad and deep bipartisan support for Chuckwalla locally and across the state of California,” the statement read, adding that the coalition “is deeply committed to ensuring the permanent protection of the National Monument.”
As his time in the White House drew to a close, Biden in January dedicated Chuckwalla as well as Sáttítla Highlands National Monument in Northern California, becoming the president who protected more public land than any chief executive with the exception of Jimmy Carter, The Washington Post reported.
Named for the lizard found in the Sonoran and Mojave Desert and northwestern Mexico, Chuckwalla, which is south of Joshua Tree National Park, includes land sacred to tribes, a trade route used by 19th century gold prospectors and an area used by Gen. George Patton to train U.S. troops for desert combat in World War II.
Biden’s decision delighted tribal leaders, environmentalists and local elected officials who wanted the land protected for future generations. Critics saw the monument, which extends into Imperial County, as a land grab shutting off acreage that could hold valuable natural resources and support clean-energy projects.
In its lawsuit filed Thursday, May 1, the foundation, a conservative think tank, argues that the antiques act was intended to protect much smaller areas of land for specific purposes — a ruin, for example.
Presidents have overstepped their authority under the act to protest vastly larger land areas, the lawsuit alleges. If the act gives the president that much latitude, then the act itself is unconstitutional because it gives the executive branch powers held by Congress, the foundation’s complaint alleges.
The lawsuit comes as the Trump administration has signaled a desire to scale back the monument’s size.
A document posted on the White House website in March announced that President Donald Trump had abolished the monument, but that post was later deleted.
Legal experts disagree on whether a national monument can be abolished once it’s created. Conservative legal minds tend to argue that presidents can undo monuments, while Democratic lawyers argue that federal law shields monuments from being erased by executive action.
