The Justice Department said Trump could revoke the national monument. California may lose some

In a comment this week, the Justice Department said President Trump has the right to abolish national monuments shelved by the past region that the president has for protecting historical and scientific interests, and has the potential to demolish the foundations for the removal of two of California's newest monuments – Chuckwalla and Sáttítla Heights.

May 27 Legal opinion The Justice Department issued Tuesday ruled a decision of more than 80 years that the president cannot revoke national monuments created by his predecessors under the Antiquities Act.

The discovery comes after the indoor sector’s efforts to explore changing the monument, part of an effort to expand U.S. energy production, a move that sparked an alarm bell among protectionists that certain public lands may be located in chopping blocks.

Then-President Biden signed an announcement to designate the national monuments of Chuckwalla and Sátítla, and went north to the north shortly before leaving the office early this year. The new opinion of the Justice Department says it requires a study on whether the Antiquities Act (the 1906 law allows the president to create monuments) can be used to revoke them.

The comment is titled “Revoke the previous monument’s name”, so to speak.

In the 50-page document, Associate Assistant Atty. General Lanora Pettit wrote that the president could find “landmarks, “structures” or “objects” or “objects” that were never or no longer worthy of the protection of the act in previous statements; such changes could completely eliminate the retention of land previously associated with the national monument.”

Since its adoption, the Antiquities Act has been designated by 18 presidents (allocated evenly between Republicans and Democrats). California is home to 21 national monuments, more than any other state.

During a hearing in Washington Wednesday, U.S. Senator Alexander Padilla (D-Calif.) asked Home Secretary Doug Burgum about the view, which he called “extremely dangerous.”

He specifically asked the secretary about the latest monuments in Golden State, which he said was enjoyed strong bipartisan support.

“We have the responsibility and direction to look at the responsibility we have created recently,” Burgum replied.

“When we limit land use, some people in the community do limit some of their economic opportunities, and we want to listen to those opportunities, too,” he said. He added that the department is looking for a “balanced approach” and will open for further conversations.

Padilla and Senator Adam Schiff are federal lawmakers from California who push for the creation of the monument.

“The Trump administration is seeking a rewrite of the Antiquities Act without Congress-approved and removing all precedents prohibiting the elimination of land designated as national monuments,” Schiff said in a statement. “And, continuing his attack on the Golden State, the president appears to have at least two California treasures: the Chuck Wolla and the Satra National Monument.”

He added: “But the law is clear: Congress has no intention of giving the Antiquities Act or any other president the power to reverse the hard work of decades of conservationists, tribal leaders and local California communities to protect valuable land and cultural sites.”

Chuckwalla sátítla Includes 224,000 acres of original forest and unique geological features near the Oregon border. Native Americans Leading the charge Protect the land they consider sacred.

Criticizes the way the Antiquities Act is used to shelve large amounts of land Point out the task The monument is limited to “the smallest area with proper care and management of the objects to be protected”.

But public land advocates noted that the president has long used the law to protect large lands, including the 1908 designation of Theodore Roosevelt Grand Canyon.

Padilla said Western countries are more large in comparison to their eastern counterparts, so “the appropriateness and scale of monuments and other designated areas tend to be greater.”

John Leshy, an emeritus professor at the University of California Law School in San Francisco and a former lawyer for the Department of the Interior, believes the new view is that the Trump administration’s “hate public land” faction on behalf of the Republican faction is largely a symbolic gesture.

He said: “I think they threw it out and tried to appease them and then said, ‘We stand by your side.’ “But will that quiet them until the president actually takes some action? I have no idea. ”

Even before California’s youngest monument was designated, there were concerns that the Trump administration might roll back.

During his first term, Trump was keen Reduced boundaries Two monuments in Utah – Bear's ears and the great staircase – Escalante – and stripped of protection from the ocean monument near the coast of New England Commercial fishing is allowed. Biden gives medicine Reversed changes.

In February, Burgum issued an order that many people saw as opening the door to eliminate or shrink the monument. He directed his assistant secretary to “review and, where appropriate, modify all withdrawn public lands”, citing federal regulations corresponding to the law that allow the president to create monuments.

Then, more than a month later, the Trump administration caused chaos when it was issued, Then it seems to back off the announcement Meaning that the president has canceled his predecessor's orders, creating Chuckwalla and sátítla.

Last month, a conservative think tank in Texas filed a federal lawsuit that invalidated the Chuck Wolla Memorial on behalf of the plaintiff, believing that Biden had surpassed his power when he created it.

Some believe California’s new monuments are at risk of being targeted at most, in part because Trump may seek to remove his predecessor’s actions.

Whether the president has the right to change the monuments. When Biden reversed the lawsuit, the lawsuit challenged Trump's previous monuments to reduce, while Biden reversed the lawsuit, and the matter was never resolved.

“The court never ruled this issue in one way or another,” Leach said. “They were just silent on whether one president could revoke another's announcement.”

There could be a lawsuit if Trump moves to California’s revoked monument.

Krystian Lahage of the Mojave Desert Land Trust, a nonprofit dedicated to protecting the California desert, said his team is trying to raise awareness of Chuckwalla's wide support.

Sunday marks the 119th anniversary of the Antiquities Act and celebrates an event co-organized by the group, Lahage said that Lahage had drawn more than 100 people. A off-road tour was conducted, exploration of geology and wildlife, stargazing and community barbecue.

“Our goal is to show people all the different things they can do in a national monument, and how it protects it,” he said.