[wiki summary]

Basin and Range Bears Ears Berryessa Snow Mountain Canyons of the Ancients Carrizo Plain Cascade Siskiyou Craters of the Moon Giant Sequoia Gold Butte Grand Canyon-Parashant Grand Staircase-Escalante Hanford Reach Ironwood Forest Mojave Trails Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks Rio Grande del Norte Sand to Snow San Gabriel Mountains Sonoran Desert Upper Missouri River Breaks Vermilion Cliffs Katahadin Woods and Waters Marine: Marianas Trench Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Pacific Remote Islands Papahanaumokuakea Rose Atoll

[MtnGoat]

That cannot be assumed these days, given the nature of arguments you see for meaningless 'diversity' based upon physical characteristics, instead of ideas.

[treeswarper]

I don't consider diversity to be meaningless. Let's not go there.

[trestle]

[MtnGoat]

[MtnGoat]

[Malachai Constant]

Among the delegation is all of Cedar Butte where most of the Ancestral Pueblo dwellings are located.

[Token Civilian]

[Malachai Constant]

Pacific Leagal Foundation is a right wing think tank that is in favor of reducing wilderness protection in general. They cited John Yoo as authority, Yoo is the author of the famous "Torture Memo" which hold that the president can do anything he wants. Legal opinion on whether National Monuments is split to some extent with no definitive court ruling. I guess we will get a chance to see if he can.

[Token Civilian]

Malachi - In lieu of the ad hominium on the article writer, how about sticking to the arguments presented and refuting those with facts. So, what do you say to the concept / principal brought up in the article that policy (e.g. stroke of a pen enactments) enacted by a President somehow is "permanent". Is that a concept you support? If so, what will you say when policies enacted by the current President are challenged by the next office holder from the other party? Will President Trump's policies be sacrosanct, or can the next President with at "D" after they name change them, just as President Trump can (wants) to change President Obama's policies? How do you address the article claims that past Presidents have reduced national monuments? Have they, in fact, done so, and if so, how are those not precedents for the current reductions?

[Malachai Constant]

The fact that presidents have reduced them is not president for anything unless those reductions were contested in court and the reduction upheld. There is no such case what has happened was there were reductions that were not contested. The reductions I am aware of were back in the Taft or Wilson administrations before modern court proceedings. I am not attacking the author of the paper but merely explaining that they are and advocacy group with the same interests as Zinke and the administration and not an unbiased source any more than an environmental organization. It is a matter for the courts. As for the act, that is a matter for congress to modify.

[drm]

As to whether what presidents do should be permanent, things that president are allowed to do via the constitution can in most cases be overturned by future presidents. One example where they can't is with pardons. But this is a case where Congress has the underlying constitutional authority and chose to delegate a piece of it to the president via the Antiquities Act. Since the Antiquities Act made no mention of reducing or removing such monuments, you could either say (1) removal/reduction wasn't delegated to presidents so they can't do it, or (2) whatever judge gets to rule on it can make it up however they want to. Unless there is another law, like the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, that has language that applies.

[Ski]

Trump administration officials dismissed benefits of national monuments / Washington Post / 07/23/18 The Interior Department Announced (By Accident) That Everything Is for Sale / Esquire 07/24/18 Public lands advocates respond to new revelations from the DOI's sham review of National Monuments / Pacific Standard 07/23/18

[Malachai Constant]

The administration is also removing reimbursement from this that damage public lands Legalizing poaching, burl theft, and cedar poaching probably next.

[MtnGoat]

[Ski]

It's not "cartoonish" by any stretch of the imagination. It's "Teapot Dome Redux". Zinke would sell his own mother to the highest bidder. The emails make it pretty clear that Zinke and his accomplices completely ignored the overwhelming public opinion that these National Monuments should be off limits to resource extraction.