[Edguysammet85]

I’m going after a pretty big sacred cow with this question, but I’m genuinely curious; from an originalist perspective, how does the federal government have the authority to set aside tens or even hundreds of thousands of square miles of land for the purpose of establishing national parks? I look on the official NPS website and they said the necessary and proper cause gave them the authority to do so. I find that claim dubious. If I bring up these kind of questions in other places I’m accused of wanting to destroy mother nature or some nonsense like that. As if only government is capable of knowing how to protect the environment.

[grt3111]

You can start here with Curtin vs. Benson:
https://cite.case.law/us/222/78/

Then go to the list of cases that mention Curtin vs. Benson
https://cite.case.law/citations/?q=3660191

Then you can also go to US Code website:
https://uscode.house.gov/
There you can dig in to statutes.

Now the gov loves to through around the word “authority”. BUT, their authority is often based on a couple of paragraphs from parts of laws/acts. Even though another section states exclusions. Then they use there “rules” to make people believe they can actually do it. There is a case (have to find it) that states the regulations/rules are only for the gov employee not for the citizen.

Also look up this statue from 1890:
https://uscode.house.gov/statviewer.htm?volume=47&page=1603
This is extremely important and what the gov land grabbers don’t want you to know. All land west of the 100th meridian that has been entered on or settled is not public land. That is cattle, sheep, miners, settlers have entered on that land. Those so called BLM and FS permits are garbage and illegal. It all started with cooperative agreements where the rancher who has the stock on the range signed an agreement with the BLM/FS for the stockman to pay a feed for gov to building fence and water structures and survey the allotments. Allotments are not gov or public land. And another case states the official allotment map is greater than a patient. When you see the gov have a “public land” map. Guess what they combine the surface and mineral rights. If they took out the mineral rights part of the map there would be very little so called “public land”. The US does have the rights to the minerals on most of the allotments but not the surface.

[Author]

Posts