Trump’s Dismantling of the National Monuments: Sacrificing Native American Interests on the Altar of Business

Amber Penn-Roco
Amber Penn-Roco is an attorney specializing in tribal sovereignty issues with Galanda Broadman, a native-owned Indian Country law firm in Seattle, Washington. She also serves as a contributing editor for NLGR.

In December of 2017, President Trump demolished the Bears Ears National Monument, shrinking it by 85 percent. That same day, President Trump also cut the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by 46 percent. The Trump Administration was urged by energy companies to shrink the National Monuments so they could take advantage of the natural resource deposits located within the National Monument areas. In February of 2018, the lands stripped from the National Monuments became open to claims and leases by energy companies. In his brief presidency, President Trump has demonstrated an utter disregard for the preservation of the land and for the recognition of tribal interests; he has proven that when those interests compete with private business interests, he will always protect the businessman, to the detriment of tribal people across the nation.

Tribal proposal to President Obama

When considering the impact of President Trump’s actions, it is important to consider the long road endured to create the Bears Ears National Monument. On October 15, 2015, the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition, which includes the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Uintah and Ouray Ute Indian Tribe and the Pueblo of Zuni, submitted their Proposal to Barack Obama for the Creation of the Bears Ears National Monument.1 The proposal was the result of six years of intensive work, and proposed a monu­ment area encompassing 1.9 million acres.2 The proposal came after years of desecration of the area, including the routine destruction of petroglyphs, ancestral dwellings and burial sites.3

For example, in 2016, immediately prior to the site designation, the area suffered from numerous vandals. In one instance, thieves attempted to steal a petroglyph of a dancer, they first used a rock saw, and then a chisel, neither of these methods worked and left the petroglyph “mauled.”4 In another, a person did donuts in an ATV in a 1,200-year-old archaeological site.5 In 2015, grave robbers looted multiple sites, and tossed aside human bones to steal ceramics that were buried in the graves.6 The Proposal sug­gested a way to end the desecration of the area: through the formation of a National Monument.

President Obama establishes Bears Ears National Monument

On December 28, 2016, in a presidential proclamation, President Obama established the Bears Ears National Monument, a 1.35-million-acre area.7 The proclamation is poetic. It begins:

Rising from the center of the southeastern Utah landscape and visible from every direction are twin buttes so distinctive that in each of the native languages of the region their name is the same: Hoon’Naqvut, Shash Jáa, Kwiyagatu Nukavachi, Ansh An Lashokdiwe, or “Bears Ears.” For hundreds of generations, native peoples lived in the surrounding deep sandstone canyons, desert mesas, and meadow mountaintops, which constitute one of the densest and most significant cultural landscapes in the United States. Abundant rock art, ancient cliff dwellings, ceremonial sites, and countless other artifacts provide an extraordinary archaeological and cultural record that is important to us all, but most notably the land is profoundly sacred to many Native American tribes, including the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, Navajo Nation, Ute Indian Tribe of the Uintah Ouray, Hopi Nation, and Zuni Tribe. . . .8

From earth to sky, the region is unsurpassed in wonders. The star-filled nights and natural quiet of the Bears Ears area transport visitors to an ear­lier eon. Against an absolutely black night sky, our galaxy and others more distant leap into view. As one of the most intact and least roaded areas in the contiguous United States, Bears Ears has that rare and arresting quality of deafening silence.9

The presidential proclamation goes on to recognize the rich history of the area, noting the “Clovis people hunted among the cliffs and canyons of Cedar Mesa as early as 13,000 years ago” and that “hunters and gatherers continued to live in this region in the Archaic Period, with sites dating as far back as 8,500 years ago.”10 It also notes that the “area’s cultural importance to Native American tribes continues to this day. As they have for generations, these tribes and their members come here for ceremonies and to visit sacred sites.” The proclamation continues:

Traditions of hunting, fishing, gathering, and wood cutting are still prac­ticed by tribal members, as is collection of medicinal and ceremonial plants, edible herbs, and materials for crafting items like baskets and footwear. The traditional ecological knowledge amassed by the Native Americans whose ancestors inhabited this region, passed down from generation to generation, offers critical insight into the historic and scientific significance of the area. Such knowledge is, itself, a resource to be protected and used in understanding and managing this landscape sustainably for generations to come.11 The presidential proclamation concludes that the “Protection of the Bears Ears area will preserve its cultural, prehistoric, and historic legacy and main­tain its diverse array of natural and scientific resources, ensuring that the prehistoric, historic, and scientific values of this area remain for the benefit of all Americans.”12

In the proclamation, President Obama also established the Bears Ears Com­mission, made up of officers from the tribes in the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition. The Bears Ears Commission was established “[i]n recognition of the importance of tribal participation to the care and management of the ob­jects identified above, and to ensure that management decisions affecting the monument reflect tribal expertise and traditional and historical knowledge.”13

Overall, President Obama’s dedication of the Bears Ears National Monu­ment was a beautiful declaration to the tribal people, noting both the historic and current importance of the site to the tribes, the beauty of the natural area and the importance of preserving cultural, natural and historic resources. Its respect for the area and for the tribes that call the area home is clear. But, the artful and expressive deference demonstrated in President Obama’s proclamation stands in stark contrast to President Trump’s actions towards the Bears Ears area.

President Trump orders review of national monument designations

On April 26, 2017, President Trump issued Executive Order 13792 on the Review of Designations Under the Antiquities Act.14 The executive order directed the secretary of the interior to “conduct a review of all presidential designations or expansions of designations under the Antiquities Act made since January 1, 1996.”15 T he s ecretary’s r eview w as r equired t o i nclude monuments “where the designation covers more than 100,000 acres, where the designation after expansion covers more than 100,000 acres, or where the Secretary determines that the designation or expansion was made without adequate public outreach and coordination with relevant stakeholders.”16 The executive order ordered the review of 27 of the 57 national monuments designated under the Antiquities Act since January 1, 1996, including Bears Ears National Monument. However, Bears Ears National Monument is the only monument specifically listed in President Trump’s executive order.

Under the executive order, the secretary was required to determine whether the designations were “made in accordance with the requirements and origi­nal objectives of the [Antiquities] Act.”17 In making this determination, the secretary was directed to consider the following factors:

(i) the requirements and original objectives of the Act, including the Act’s requirement that reservations of land not exceed “the smallest area compat­ible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected”; (ii) whether designated lands are appropriately classified under the Act as “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, [or] other objects of historic or scientific interest”;

(iii) the effects of a designation on the available uses of designated Federal lands, including consideration of the multiple-use policy of section 102(a) (7) of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701(a) (7)), as well as the effects on the available uses of Federal lands beyond the monument boundaries;

(iv) the effects of a designation on the use and enjoyment of non-Federal lands within or beyond monument boundaries;

(v) concerns of state, tribal, and local governments affected by a designa­tion, including the economic development and fiscal condition of affected states, tribes, and localities;

(vi) the availability of federal resources to properly manage designated areas; and

(vii) such other factors as the Secretary deems appropriate.18

The executive order required the secretary to provide an interim report within 45 days and summarize the his findings specifically on the Bears Ears National Monument and any “such other designations as the Secretary deter­mines to be appropriate for inclusion in the interim report.”19 The secretary was also required to provide “recommendations for such Presidential actions, legislative proposals, or other actions consistent with law.”20 Following the interim report, the secretary was required to give, within 120 days, a final report to the president that summarized the his findings on all designations and contained recommendations for actions.21

In conducting his review, the secretary was required to “consult and co­ordinate with the governors of states affected by monument designations or other relevant officials of affected state, tribal, and local governments.”22

Secretary submits an interim report

On June 10, 2017, the secretary submitted his interim report.23 It recom­mended that:

(1) the existing boundary of the BENM be modified to be consistent with the intent of the Act; (2) Congress authorize tribal co-management of designated cultural areas; (3) Congress designate selected areas within the existing BENM as national recreation areas or national conservation areas, as defined by law; and (4) Congress clarify the intent of the management practices of wilderness or WSAs within a monument.24

While the secretary claimed that he consulted with local tribes, even stat­ing that the tribes were “very happy” and “desire[d] co-management” of Bears Ears, tribal representatives stated that this was false.25 They claimed that, in fact, Zinke ignored months of requests from tribal representatives, but finally capitulated to a short one-hour meeting.26 U.S. Sen. Tom Udall, the vice-chair of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, stated that it is clear that “Zinke did not properly consult with tribes . . . He never adequately engaged the tribes, or the public.”27

President Trump shrinks national monuments

On December 4, 2017, President Trump issued a presidential proclamation modifying the Bears Ears National Monument.28 The presidential proclama­tion shrank the Bears Ears National Monument by 85 percent, to 201,876 acres.29 The same day, President Trump also issued a presidential proclama­tion modifying the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument,30 cutting it by 46 percent, to 1,003,863 acres.31

Secretary submits a final report

On December 5, 2017, a day after the President’s proclamations were is­sued, the Secretary submitted his final report.32 In the report, the secretary recommended modifying the boundaries of four national monuments: the Bears Ears, Grand Staircase, Cascade-Siskiyou, and Gold Butte National Monuments. This recommendation indicates that President Trump’s cuts on the Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument is likely just the beginning of the Trump Administration’s deci­mation of the national monuments.

After the report was issued, representatives from local tribes, Carleton Bowekaty, a councilman of the Pueblo of Zuni and co-chair of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition and David Filfred, a council delegate for the Navajo Nation Council, highlighted the lack of consultation, stating:

It is time to set the record straight. The President, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, the Utah congressional delegation and Utah’s governor did not consult with us in making their decision to shrink Bears Ears. This is the work of powerful politicians playing the same old game, and attempting to bring the swamp to southern Utah.

They did not work with us, despite their claims that they heard the voices of tribes. The voice of the Navajo Nation, the Hopi Tribe, the Ute Indian Tribe, the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe and the Pueblo of Zuni has been uni­form, consistent and loud: Protect our homelands, histories and cultures by preserving the Bears Ears National Monument.33

They stated that it “is simply not enough to hear our voices and ignore them outright” and noted that the “failure to consult with our elected leaders on gutting Bears Ears also abdicates the trust duty the United States has to our nations.”34 They concluded, “The lack of understanding and regard that this administration has shown for Native Nations has been abhorrent, and this attempted dismantling of Bears Ears follows what is becoming a long line of attacks.”35

Parties file litigation challenging the presidential proclamation

On December 4, 2017, the Hopi Tribe, Navajo Nation, Ute Indian Tribe, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, and Zuni Tribe filed a “Complaint for Injunctive and Declaratory Relief” in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging claims against the President, the Secretary, the Director of the Bureau of Land Management, the Secretary of Agriculture, and the Chief of the U.S. Forest Service.36

A variety of other lawsuits have been filed challenging the Presidential Proclamation on Bears Ears, including: (1) a lawsuit by a coalition of differ­ent interest groups, including Utah Dine Bikeyah, Patagonia Works, Friends of Cedar Mesa, Archaeology Southwest, Conservation Lands Foundation, Access Fund, Society for Vertebrate Paleontology, National Trust for Historic Preservation; and (2) a lawsuit by eleven environmental groups, including the Wilderness Society, National Parks Conservation Association, Sierra Club, Grand Canyon Trust, Defenders of Wildlife, Great Old Broads for Wilderness, Western Watersheds Project, WildEarth Guardians, Center for Biological Diversity, Natural Resources Defense Council, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.37

Further, lawsuits have been filed challenging the Grand Staircase-Escalante Proclamation, including: (1) a lawsuit by ten environmental groups, including the Wilderness Society, Defenders of Wildlife, Natural Resources Defense Council, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Grand Canyon Trust, Great Old Broads for Wilderness, Western Watersheds Project, WildEarth Guardians, Sierra Club, Center for Biological Diversity; and (2) a lawsuit by the Grand Staircase Escalante Partners, Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, Conserva­tion Lands Foundation.

In other words, the proclamations are being challenged by a wide variety of groups, including tribes, environmental organizations, paleontology orga­nizations, and private companies. The sheer amount of support and variety of opponents is staggering.

Bears Ears and the Antiquities Act

The complaint by the tribes alleges that the presidential proclamation shrinking Bears Ears National Monument “violated the Antiquities Act, seized an authority that the Constitution vests in Congress, exceeded the power delegated to the President by Congress, and should be declared unlawful and enjoined to prevent its implementation.”38 Accordingly, the litigation over the Bears Ears National Monument will focus on the Antiquities Act.

As provided in the Property Clause of the Constitution, Congress holds the authority to dispose of, regulate, and protect public lands. In the Antiqui­ties Act, Congress delegated to the executive the power to protect “historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest” that are on federal lands and reserve, and withdraw lands into federal ownership “confined to the smallest area compatible with proper care and management of the objects to be protected.”39 In other words, the Antiquities Act allows the president to invoke Congress’ authority to designate federal public lands.

Congress still possesses the authority to alter any presidential designation. In the past, “Congress has expanded and reduced the size of proclaimed monuments and abolished eleven. . . . While presidents have also expanded boundaries, and even diminished boundaries 18 times with congressional acquiescence, no president has rescinded a proclaimed monument.”40 In ex­amining the Antiquities Act, “[m]any legal scholars point out that Congress retained its constitutional authority to diminish or revoke a monument because the Act only grants a president the authority to create national monuments; others argue there is implicit presidential authority to rescind.”41

Therefore, the primary issue in determining whether President Trump’s presidential proclamation shrinking Bears Ears National Monument ex­ceeded his authority under the Antiquities Act is whether the Antiquities Act provides presidents with an implied authority to rescind monuments. The Complaint by the Tribes affirmatively states that the Antiquities Act does not provide any implied authority to rescind, stating:

The Antiquities Act authorizes Presidents to designate federal public lands, such as Bears Ears, as national monuments to safeguard and preserve landmarks, structures, and objects of historic or scientific importance. The Antiquities Act, however, does not authorize presidents to rescind or modify national monuments created by their predecessors, and certainly not to revoke and replace them with smaller ones as has been done here. That power is reserved to Congress alone.42

This issue has not been litigated previously. Accordingly, President Trump “seeks to exercise untested discretion under the Act [to] rescind the Bears Ears National Monument designation. This level of uncertainty provides an opportunity for litigation of issues of first impression.”43

Overall, while the Antiquities Act clearly provides presidents with the authority to protect historic landmarks by withdrawing the land into federal ownership, the reverse is not true. It seems an impermissible extension of presidential authority to assume that the power to protect lands also includes an implied authority to rescind those protections, especially when Congress expressly retained those powers.

Shash Jaa National Monument and Indian Creek National Monument Act

In an apparent effort to solidify President Trump’s changes to the Bears Ears National Monument, regardless of the outcome of the previously discussed litigation, Rep. John Curtis introduced the “Shash Jaa National Monument and Indian Creek National Monument Act.” This would reduce the Bears Ears National Monument by 85 percent. Mr. Curtis has purported that the Act would “create the first Tribally managed national monument.”44 While it is true that the Act would require the establishment of a management council, including four Native Americans, it allows the president to select the mem­bers, without any input from tribal representatives. Further, the management council would include two members of the San Juan County Board of Com­missioners, but only include representatives from two of the five tribes of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition. Russell Begaye, president of the Navajo Nation stated, “Far from empowering tribes, it would put local politicians and ‘handpicked’ Native Americans in charge.”45 Mr. Begaye declared that the “management in this bill is tribal in name only.”46

Representatives from the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition have also stated that the Act will “eviscerate the important collaborative government-to-government management role for tribes recognized and honored in the Obama proclamation.”47 The Coalition noted,

In fact, this bill completely undermines the ability of our tribes to protect the resources President Obama sought to preserve for us indefinitely. It does so by filtering our voice through the very individuals who fought most vociferously against our tribes having a voice in the management of our historic, religious, and cultural patrimony at Bears Ears.”48

The Coalition also pointed out that “[i]n characteristic Utah congressional fashion, Congressman Curtis developed this ‘pro-tribal’ bill without ever consulting with our tribes, or any of the tribes of the five tribes coalition.”49

Natural resources in the National Monument areas

Public discourse has been quick to point out that the areas removed from the National Monuments are rich in oil, gas, coal, and uranium.50 The Bureau of Land Management has designated parts of the Bears Ears area as areas with high-to-moderate oil and gas development potential.51 Further, a U.S. Geological Survey estimated that 62 billion tons of coal are in a plateau that sits within the Grand Staircase-Escalante, in other words “Utah’s biggest coal field” where there are currently no mining leases.52 While President Trump has justified the reduction of Bears Ears by argu­ing that public land must be available for “public uses” he has not admitted that he was motivated by the potential to exploit the land.53 However, the Washington Post obtained documents pointing to a concerted effort by energy companies that “urged the Trump administration to limit the monument to the smallest size needed to protect key objects and areas, such as archeological sites, to make it easier to access the radioactive ore.”54 In a letter the Depart­ment of the Interior, the Colorado-based Energy Fuels Resources advocated altering Bears Ears in ways that would protect the company’s assets, located just outside the Bears Ears National Monument.55 These assets included the United States’ last operating uranium mill.56 The company’s chief operating officer wrote that “[r]educing our reliance on foreign sources of uranium requires a facility that can process the abundant uranium resources that are located in the region near the White Mesa mill.”57 The issue of uranium min­ing is particularly important to the Navajo Nation, as many uranium mines —which have been designated as superfund sites—remain near Navajo lands, resulting in contamination of the tribe’s water sources.58

Meanwhile, the New York Times obtained internal agency documents demonstrating that “[e]ven before President Trump officially opened his high-profile review last spring of federal lands protected as national monu­ments, the Department of Interior was focused on the potential for oil and gas exploration at a protected Utah site.”59 The documents contains maps depicting boundary changes that would “resolve all known mineral conflicts,” referring to the oil and gas sites on the land.60 The New York Times sued to obtain access to the documents61 and maintained that:

The internal Interior Department emails and memos also show the cen­tral role that concerns over gaining access to coal reserves played in the decision by the Trump administration to shrink the size of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by about 47 percent, to just over 1 million acres.

Mr. Zinke’s staff developed a series of estimates on the value of coal that could potentially be mined from a section of Grand Staircase called the Kaiparowits plateau. As a result of Mr. Trump’s action, major parts of the area are no longer a part of the national monument.62

Overall, the New York Times noted that “[f]rom the start of the Inte­rior Department review process, agency officials directed staff to figure out how much coal, oil and natural gas . . . had been put essentially off limits, or made harder to access, by the decision to designate the areas as national monuments.”63 Accordingly, the federal government’s own records reveal President Trump’s motivation behind shrinking of the national monuments.


Trump Administration’s sacrifice of tribal ancestral land

The reduction of the Bears Ears National Monument is only President Trump’s most recent demonstration of his dedication to sacrificing tribal ancestral homes to business interests. Earlier in 2017, President Trump signed a memorandum to the Secretary of the Army directing the Secretary to expedite review of the Dakota Access Pipeline, noting that “I believe that construction and operation of lawfully permitted pipeline infrastructure serve the national interest.”64 Immediately after signing the memorandum, President Trump ignored questions about the pipeline’s impact on Standing Rock Sioux Tribe.65

As most are aware, the Dakota Access Pipeline was the subject of a mas­sive collaborative protest by many Native American tribes, in what many recognized as one of the largest gatherings of Native American protestors in modern times. The tribes and groups opposing the pipeline were primarily concerned with the proximity to the Standing Rock Sioux’s only source of drinking water. The tribes’ fears were well founded. By January 2018, the Dakota Access Pipeline had suffered from five spills, with commenters noting “[t]he series of spills in the pipelines’ first months of operation underlines a fact that regulators and industry insiders know well: Pipelines leak.”66

Further, in April 2017, President Trump issued a permit to TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P., authorizing Keystone to construct, connect, operate and maintain the Keystone Pipeline67 across the territories of numerous tribes. The tribes also opposed the Keystone Pipeline, noting that federal government “failed to adequately consult and negotiate the matter with them, despite the direct effect the pipeline’s route would have on their lands.”68 Tribes were “con­cerned about a range of environmental problems like pollution, accelerated climate effects and potential danger to the tribes’ water supply.”69 Recently, the Keystone Pipeline suffered a large oil leak, spilling over 795,000 liters of oil, only 64 kilometers west of the Sisseton Wahpeton Oyate of the Lake Traverse Reservation, concerning tribal leaders.70 President Trump’s disregard for the issues important to the Native American people is clear.

President Trump’s policies are a natural outgrowth of his personal, dismis­sive and disrespectful attitude towards Native American culture. For example, at an event meant to honor Native Americans, while President Trump was hosting three Navajo Code Talkers, he used the event as an opportunity to insult Senator Elizabeth Warren, calling her “Pocahontas.”71 These comments were made beneath a portrait of Andrew Jackson, the architect of the Trail of Tears, which forced 17,000 Native Americans from their ancestral homes.72 Whether these insults are merely the mistake of an uninformed individual or a purposeful slight, the visual image, and the disrespect inherent in both of those gestures, will remain intertwined with Native American perception of President Trump.

Overall, President Trump’s policies prioritize the promotion of business interests over preservation of the land. President Trump’s sacrifice of tribal interests, values and places—in exchange for profits and the lining of business­men’s pockets—will be a defining characteristic of the Trump Administration, at least to the Native American people whose lives he has impacted. The ut­ter lack of respect for tribal ancestral grounds and the cultural, historic and natural resources contained within those lands, is appalling. Trump’s actions will have repercussions for generations to come.



  1. Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition, Proposal to President Barak Obama for the Creation of Bears Ears National Monument, 12, 2015), available at Tribal-Coalition-Proposal-10-15-15.pdf.
  2. Id.
  3. Kelly Bastone, The Fight for Bears Ears National Monument, BackPacker (July 20, 2016),
  4. Id.
  5. Id.
  6. Id.
  7. Proclamation No. 9558, 82 C.F.R. 1139 (2016), available at https://obamawhitehouse.
  8. Id.
  9. Id.
  10. Id.
  11. Id.
  12. Id.
  13. Id.
  14. Exec. Order No. 13792, 82 Fed. Reg. 20429 (Apr. 26, 2017), available at https://www.
  15. Id.
  16. Id.
  17. Id.
  18. Id.
  19. Id.
  20. Id.
  21. Id.
  22. Id.
  23. Memorandum from Secretary of the Interior, Ryan K.Zinke, to President Donald J. Trump (June 10, 2017), available at interim_report_eo_13792.pdf.
  24. Id.
  25. Rob Capriccioso, Zinke Says Tribes are ‘Happy” to Have Bears Ears Modifications; Tribes Disagree, IndianCountry Today (Jun. 13, 2017), https://indiancountrymedi­
  26. Darryl Fears, As Zinke Listens in on the Monumental Divide at Utah’s Bears Ears, Natives Feel Unheard, Wash. Post (May 14, 2017), national/health-science/as-zinke-listens-in-on-the-monumentaldivide-at-utahs-bears-ears-natives-feel-unheard/2017/05/14/3243a7ec-3726-11e7-b4ee-434b6d506b37_story. html?utm_term=.78b1fac3b65d.
  27. Id.
  28. Proclamation No. 9681, 82 C.F.R. 58081 (2017), available at https://www.federalregister. gov/documents/2017/12/08/2017-26709/modifying-the-bears-ears-national-monument.
  29. Id.
  30. Proclamation No. 9682, 82 C.F.R. 58089 (2017), available at https://www.­case-escalante-national-monument.
  31. Id.
  32. Memorandum from Secretary of the Interior, Ryan K.Zinke, to President Donald J. Trump (Dec. 5, 2017), available at revised_final_report.pdf.
  33. Carleton Bowekaty & David Filfred, Commentary: Trump’s Actions to Cut Bears Ears is a Historic Injustice, Salt Lake Tribune (Dec. 5, 2017), opinion/commentary/2017/12/06commentary-trumps-action-to-cut-bears-ears-is-a-historic-injustice/.
  34. Id.
  35. Id.
  36. Complaint, Hopi Tribe et al. v. Trump et al., No. 1:17-cv-02590 (Dec. 4, 2017), available at
  37. Courtney Tanner, Here’s a Breakdown of the 5 Lawsuits Filed Against Trump that Challenge His Cuts to 2 Utah National Monuments, Salt Lake Tribune (Dec. 11, 2017),­down-of-the-5-lawsuits-filed-against-trump-challenging-his-cuts-to-two-utah-national-monuments/.
  38. Complaint, supra note 31.
  39. 54 U.S.C. § 320301, et seq. (June 8, 1906).
  40. Kathryn A. Tipple, Bears Ears National Monument: Unprecedented Surveys of Boundary Linds and Executive Authority, AmericanBar Association(Sept/Oct 2017), available at trends/2017-2018/september-october-2017/bears-ears-national-monument.html.
  41. Id.
  42. Complaint, supra note 31.
  43. Tipple, supra note 40.
  44. Carleton Bowekaty & Saun Chapoose, Utah Bill Tramples on Tribal Sovereignty at Bears Ears, The Hill (Jan. 3, 2018, 12:00 PM), energy-environment/367227-utah-bill-tramples-on-tribal-sovereignty-at-bears-ears.
  45. Brian Maffly, Tribal Leaders Slam Utah Rep. Curtis’ Bill to Redraw Bears Ears, Say Management Plan is Tribal ‘In Name Only’, Salt Lake Tribune (Jan. 30, 2018),
  46. Id.
  47. Bowekaty & Chapoose, supra note 36.
  48. Id.
  49. Id.
  50. Laris Karklis, Bonnie Berkowitz & Tim Meko, Areas Cut Out of Utah Monuments are Rich in Oil, Coal, Uranium, Wash. Post (Dec. 7, 2017), https://www.washingtonpost. com/graphics/2017/national/utah-monuments/?utm_term=.6583a5988b62.
  51. Id.
  52. Id.
  53. Id.
  54. Juliet Eilperin, Uranium Firm Urged Trump Officials to Shrink Bears Ears National Monument, Wash. Post (Dec. 8, 2017), national/health-science/uranium-firm-urged-trump-officials-to-shrink-bears-ears-national-monument/2017/12/08/2eea39b6-dc31-11e7-b1a8-62589434a581_story. html?utm_term=.99b53a383235.
  55. Brian Maffly, Uranium Mill Pressed Trump Officials for Bears Ears Reductions, Records Show, Salt Lake Tribune (Dec. 13, 2017), news/2017/12/13/uranium-mill-pressed-trump-officials-for-bears-ears-reductions-records-show/.
  56. Id.
  57. Id.
  58. Id.
  59. Eric Lipton & Lisa Friedman, Oil was Central in Decision to Shrink Bears Ears Monument, Emails Show, N.Y. Times (Mar. 2, 2018), 03/02/climate/bears-ears-national-monument.html.
  60. Id.
  61. Id.
  62. Id.
  63. Id.
  64. Memorandum from President Donald J. Trump to Secretary of the Army (Jan. 24 2017), available at construction-of-the-dakota-access-pipeline.
  65. Tom DiChristopher, Trump Ignores Question About Standing Rock Sioux After Signing Dakota Access Order, CNBC(Jan. 24, 2017, 12:48 PM), https://www.cnbc. com/2017/01/24/trump-ignores-standing-rock-sioux-question-after-dakota-access-order.html.
  66. Alleen Brown, Five Spills, Six Months in Operation: Dakota Access Track Record Highlights Unavoidable Reality—Pipelines Leak, Intercept (Jan. 9, 2018, 3:38 PM),
  67. Notice of Issuance of a Presidential Permit to TransCanada Keystone Pipeline, L.P., 82 C.F.R. 16467 (Apr. 4, 2017).
  68. Robert Boos, Native American Tribes Unite to Fight the Keystone Pipeline and Government ‘Disrespect’, PRI( Feb. 1 9, 2 015, 8 :45 A M), h ttps:// stories/2015-02-19/native-american-tribes-unite-fight-keystone-pipeline-and-govern­ment-disrespect.
  69. Id.
  70. Jorge Barrera, Native American Tribe Bracing for Keystone Pipeline Leak Impact, CBC (Nov. 16, 2017, 9:14 PM),
  71. Simon Moya-Smith, Trump’s Disrespect for Native Americans is Nothing New, CNN (Nov. 29, 2017, 7:20 PM),
  72. Id.