This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
As a former Utah attorney general, one who has researched, debated and listened to all the back and forth regarding public lands in Utah and across the Western United States, I'd like to offer my perspective.
In August of 2014 Conference of Western Attorneys General (CWAG) formed a committee to examine the legal issues involved in the status of public lands in the fifteen states represented by CWAG. Representatives from each state, coordinated by a designated person, would identify and research all relevant issues. The research would be shared, discussed by teleconference, emailed and then a draft of report would be shared.
In July of 2016, at a yearly meeting, the AGs voted to adopt the report. The count was eleven for and one against with one abstention. The nay vote was Nevada and Utah abstained. It is almost unprecedented for such an overwhelming majority to come to the same conclusions on an issue as crucial as this one.
All the western states have a lot at stake in the outcome of this research and countless hours, effort, consultation and cooperation went into the 48-page final report.
As former AG of Utah, I know how valuable interstate cooperation is and how effective this cooperation can be. I was the national chair of the anti-trust committee and helped coordinate and launch several anti-trust suits against large international corporations. The united AGs were a formidable force and we achieved great success.
In the western public land debate AGs play the same role. Their 48-page discussion of the issues and conclusions are thorough and legally persuasive. The report concluded that the state's claim to federal public land is without merit. Congress, by virtue of the Constitution and rulings of the Supreme Court, has the ultimate say regarding federal public lands.
The damning report cites Supreme Court rulings going back nearly a century that state clearly that the United States has authority to maintain and manage lands on behalf of all Americans.
Some CWAG members, including the AG in Colorado, have publicly spoken in support of the movement to transfer U.S. public lands to states. But they set aside their political beliefs to deliver an objective analysis of the likelihood of any lawsuit's success.
Utah is currently considering using an outside law firm to sue the federal government. The CWAG's opinion represents a tremendous amount of accumulated expertise, and much of it comes from career staffers with a deep understanding of administrative and constitutional law — a far cry from the $14 million the state of Utah's outside law firm would stand to make from the very lawsuit this report criticizes.
The CWAG report should put to rest the information disseminated by some of Utah's most-vocal legislators and the American Lands Council who have worked to promote the belief that a wholesale public land transfer is possible.
It's time that Utah's lawyer, AG Sean Reyes, shares this research with the Utah Legislature and the public. Instead of filing a quixotic lawsuit that stands no chance at success, Utah can invest the millions saved to help fund our "last in the nation" school system.
Paul Van Dam was Utah attorney general from 1989 to 1993.