jonny5
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 4, 2012
- Messages
- 27,581
- Reaction score
- 4,664
- Location
- Republic of Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian
it was already federal land, there was no seizure of any kind.... Obama simply changed the designation of the federal land in question, which he was empowered to do by Congress.
the act does not empower the President to seize private land... but it does empower him to reserve or accept such property.
additionally, SCOTUS has ruled on 3 cases involving the Act... it's been upheld in each case
for the SCOTUS nerds among us.. here are the cases in case you want to dig into them
United States v. California, 436 U.S. 32, 56 L. Ed. 2d 94, 98 S. Ct. 1662 (1978)
Cappaert v. United States, 426 U.S. 128, 141-42, 48 L. Ed. 2d 523, 96 S. Ct. 2062 (1976)
Cameron v. United States, 252 U.S. 450, 64 L. Ed. 659, 40 S. Ct. 410 (1920).
Technically it was Mexican land. The US govt took it from them during a war, something they also arent allowed to do. When NM became a state, it became their land. I can find no agreement between NM and the fed giving them power over their land for the purposes of creating parks.