The State of Utah is pursuing a legal case to compel the federal government to relinquish control of millions of acres of unappropriated lands within its borders. This effort, if successful, could potentially lead to the divestment of hundreds of millions of acres of federal land across the western United States.

Utah's lawsuit targets over 18 million acres managed by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management. The state argues that it is unconstitutional for the federal government to hold lands not designated for specific uses by Congress. The case raises concerns among those who value public lands, including New Mexico hunters and anglers, about potential privatization efforts.

In response, the U.S. Department of Justice has urged the Supreme Court to reject Utah’s petition, citing that Congress holds the authority over public property disposition as per the U.S. Constitution. "A court therefore could not order Congress to enact legislation disposing of federal lands," states the government's brief.

The Supreme Court is set to decide in January whether it will hear Utah’s case. Should it decline, Utah may continue its legal pursuit in lower courts with intentions to appeal up to the Supreme Court eventually.

This lawsuit reflects longstanding tensions regarding federal land ownership in Western states like Utah, where approximately 65% of land is federally owned—a figure second only to Nevada. Some political figures and groups support Utah's stance, arguing that such holdings hinder state taxation and development opportunities.

Utah Senators Mike Lee and Mitt Romney have submitted a brief supporting their state's position, stating that other Western states share similar grievances about "an overbearing federal government."

Thirteen other states have filed briefs supporting Utah's request for a Supreme Court hearing on this matter. These include Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, South Carolina and Texas.

Meanwhile, organizations such as the New Mexico Wildlife Federation oppose any requirement for federal divestment from public lands. They emphasize that these lands are vital for recreation and tourism industries in New Mexico and are considered a national asset allowing equitable access to natural resources.

As this legal battle unfolds with historical ties back to movements like the Sagebrush Rebellion against federal regulations in past decades—the outcome could significantly impact land management policies across several states.