Connect with us

Utah

Sens. Lee and Romney make a power play for Utah and the West

Published

on

Sens. Lee and Romney make a power play for Utah and the West


Republican lawmakers in the West say they want states to control more of their own land, rather than Washington, D.C., officials, especially as the state’s residents are deprived of benefits they would get if it was under state ownership.

Sen. Mike Lee along with Sen. Mitt Romney and Utah Reps. John Curtis, Celeste Maloy, Blake Moore, Burgess Owens and Wyoming Rep. Harriet Hageman submitted a friend of the court brief to support Utah’s case before the U.S. Supreme Court as the state hopes to take control of 18.5 million acres of unappropriated land.

The public land Utah wants to bring back under state control doesn’t include national parks, national monuments and national forests — much of it is desert scape or farm lands, not necessarily the photo-worthy landscapes some people think of when they hear the term public lands.

The federal government oversees 70% of the state’s land, and rules can change on how that land can be used depending on who is in charge of the White House. In the brief, lawmakers said they submitted it not only because it is a constitutional issue, but because they wanted to begin reversing harms Utah and the West have experienced from federal government control over their lands.

Advertisement

Lee said in a statement to the Deseret News that the vast control of Utah land by the federal government “has increasingly limited what Utahns can do in their backyard.”

“This has to change, and I am proud to stand with Utah families — along with our entire congressional delegation — urging the Supreme Court to allow this case to move,” Lee continued.

In Romney’s statement to the Deseret News, he noted Utah has “one of the highest percentages of its land owned by the federal government.”

“Whether or not the federal government can continue to indefinitely control more than 18 million acres of this land—which is currently unappropriated—should be considered,” said Romney. “Public lands are best managed by those closest to them.”

Frustrated over the lack of local control over the land, state lawmakers in Utah decided to go straight to the Supreme Court, to address some of the harms they see to the state’s resident. Federal agencies can impact the livelihoods of Utahns by saying how much access farmers have to land for grazing, which roads Utahns can use or where campers can set up their tents.

Advertisement

The state hired former U.S. Solicitor General Paul Clement and seasoned Supreme Court advocate Erin Murphy to argue the case. The suit argues the federal government makes money off Utah’s lands through commercial filmmaking and grazing and the state loses out on that revenue.

But more than that, Utah said the federal government’s control of the land was unconstitutional — and that the feds would not budge when asked to return unappropriated land to the state. Unappropriated land is land held by the Bureau of Land Management that isn’t reserved for a designated purpose.

Who gets to control the land?

There are a couple of core questions the lawsuit wants the Supreme Court to rule on. Should states or the federal government have sovereignty or control over these lands? And, is it fair for people living in the state to face changing rules on how the land is used?

In their brief, Lee, Romney and the representatives made the case the Supreme Court should give Utah control over unappropriated land. They noted Utah’s lawsuit came after state leaders repeatedly requested the federal government give up these lands — only to be repeatedly ignored.

It’s a uniquely western phenomenon to have more than half of the land in a state controlled by the federal government. According to Ballotpedia, most states East of the Mississippi have well below 10% of their land owned by the federal government, but in the West that number is much higher. The lawmakers say this puts the state on unequal footing with other states in the U.S.

Advertisement

Nearly half of the land the federal government owns in Utah is used either for profit or is just held, said the group of politicians in the brief. It isn’t used under a specific constitutional power. But because Utah doesn’t own the land, the state can’t tax or regulate it.

This means the federal government denies Utah basic powers other states have over their land, the brief says. This is unique to Utah and nine other Western states that also have a lot of land owned by the federal government.

“By allocating control over one-third of Utah’s land to the BLM (Bureau of Land Management), the United States altogether denies Utah ownership over that land,” said the brief. This reduces equality with other states and “imposes second-class status” onto Utah and other Western states.

Utah and Western states can’t manage lands within their own boundaries in ways that would lead to the flourishing of citizens, the brief says.

The brief raises another issue — the president’s control over state lands. To the frustration of local citizens, presidents have expanded the size of national monuments without input from local residents. Former President Bill Clinton designated Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument without stepping foot on Utah soil. The area was going to be used for coal mining and people in the surrounding area experienced economic hardship because of the monument designation.

Advertisement

Presidents can step in and declare land monuments or not because of the Antiquities Act. It’s a law which the brief said has allowed presidents to vastly expand monuments and landmarks without limit.

“The President should not have more control over Utah’s land than the people of Utah or their elected representatives,” said the brief. The Supreme Court’s ruling on Utah’s lawsuit could end up resolving some existing legal issues involving the Antiquities Act.

The brief does raise some of the issues local residents have faced because of the federal control of land.

In Panguitch, a charming town that’s the seat of Garfield County, local sawmill workers faced unemployment when the amount of timber the mill was allowed to take out of the national forests was whittled down. Even as one of the main industries that kept the town booming was shut down in 1996, state and federal lawmakers could do nothing about it.

SUWA response to Utah lawsuit

But opponents to the state’s lawsuit see it as corrosive to conservation. Shortly after Utah filed its suit, team members at the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance stopped by the Deseret News for an on the record editorial board meeting.

Advertisement

During the meeting Steve Bloch, the group’s legal director, said the state was emboldened by the 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court and that’s why they didn’t go to federal district court.

Putting up a map of the lands owned by the federal government in Utah (highlighting the unappropriated lands), Bloch said the term is used for PR to make people think the land isn’t special. He doesn’t think Utah could actually afford to take over the land anyway.

“This is just an unserious approach,” said Bloch. “This is anti-federal rhetoric.” He added he thought it was “throwing red meat at some part of the electorate in Utah who’s animated by this.”

SUWA may see it as anti-federal rhetoric, but Utah politicians say this suit has been a long-time coming after trying to work with the federal government for years.

“We’ve been asking for 50 years,” said Utah Gov. Spencer Cox when announcing the suit. “And not only are they not willing to negotiate or help on this at all, it’s the exact opposite. It’s not only ‘no,’ but, ‘hell no, and we’re going to close more of your roads and make it harder.”

Advertisement



Source link

Utah

Utah hit with largest measles outbreak in over 30 years

Published

on

Utah hit with largest measles outbreak in over 30 years


Utah has been hit with the largest measles outbreak in more than 30 years.

The Utah State Epidemiologist stated that it’s the most contagious disease scientists know of.

As of this month, the Utah Department of Health and Human Services reported 115 confirmed cases.

MORE | Measles

“It’s a little surprising to see an uptick in measles, but it’s not surprising to hear that Utah County is one of the places where we have seen more of those cases,” said Elsie, a Utah County resident with several children in local schools. “I think because there’s kind of been a movement towards anti-vaccination.”

Advertisement

Samantha Marberger, who also lives in Utah County and has a young child, said measles wasn’t something she thought was here.

“I’ve heard of big outbreaks like that in Texas and a few other places, but it wasn’t something that I thought was as local,” she said.

Utah State Epidemiologist Leisha Nolen called the outbreak “extreme” and “really concerning.”

“Why does the health department believe this is happening now? Is this like a delayed reaction of previous low vaccination rates?” 2News asked her.

“Yeah, I think unfortunately our vaccine rates have gone down over time, and we do now have a number of people who are vulnerable to this infection, and they haven’t been protected,” Nolen said. “There also has been cases in neighboring states, and so it was easy to introduce here in Utah.”

Advertisement

The DHHS stated that roughly 90% of the population is vaccinated, but those rates vary from area to area and aren’t enough to reach herd immunity for measles.

“Measles is highly contagious. It’s the most contagious infection we know of,” Nolen said. “The data historically says that if you have 20 people in a room and somebody with measles comes in, 18 of those people are going to get measles.”

She said that since the outbreak started, the health department has given 30% more vaccines than they did last year at this time. She said most infections can be traced back to southwestern Utah and appear to be from in-state travel.

“It’s likely in Utah, many hundreds of Utahns who are vaccinated have been exposed to this virus, and they did not know it, and their bodies fought it off as it should,” Nolen said.

The second largest outbreak in Utah is in Utah County, with 10 confirmed cases.

Advertisement

The state is asking people to cooperate with the health department’s contact tracers if they call.

If you suspect measles in yourself or a loved one, they urge you not to go to a clinic waiting room but call ahead for the next steps to stop the spread.

_____



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Utah

Widow of slain Utah County sergeant testifies in favor of accomplice’s parole

Published

on

Widow of slain Utah County sergeant testifies in favor of accomplice’s parole


EAGLE MOUNTAIN, Utah — Nannette Wride-Zeeman says her late husband, Utah County Sheriff’s Sergeant Cory Wride, is still very much a part of her life nearly 12 years after he was ambushed and killed in Eagle Mountain.

On Tuesday, Wride-Zeeman did something that might surprise many people: She testified in favor of parole for Meagan Grunwald, the young woman who was an accomplice in her husband’s murder.

Wride’s killer lost his life in a shootout with police the same day as the ambush. But Grunwald, who was with the shooter, has been serving time for her role in the crime.

Before the parole hearing, Wride-Zeeman met Grunwald face to face on Monday for the first time since the tragedy.

Advertisement

“She was in the other room, hyperventilating and sobbing. And she was so afraid to come and meet me. And I can’t even tell you. The days and probably weeks of sleepless nights I had, being afraid to meet her, and what do I say, and how do I, how do I do this, and am I making a mistake, and like all these things that it felt in my heart, just this calm feeling like it was the right thing to do,” Wride-Zeeman said.

“She was so afraid that I was going to be angry with her, and those angry days have long passed,” she said.

When Grunwald entered the room, the emotion was overwhelming for both women.

“And she came walking in, she had her hands over her face, and she was still sobbing and she was shaking. And I just saw this little girl that was just terrified,” Wride-Zeeman said.

“And she’s sitting across from me, and she, her hands or her face are in her hands, and she’s just sobbing, and she keeps repeating, I’m so afraid, I’m so afraid. I’m so sorry, I’m so sorry, I’m so afraid, just back and forth. And when she got done, I said, Megan, you don’t have anything to be afraid of. I said, Look at me, and she looks up at me, and I see her blue eyes and all the tears,” she said.

Advertisement

What happened next was a moment of healing that lasted three hours.

“So I walked over to her, and I went like this to her, and she stood up, and we embraced for the first time, and she just sobbed and sobbed. And I just held her and I said, do not be afraid of me. We’re here to heal. And it opened up 3 hours of healing,” Wride-Zeeman said.

The widow says she has completely forgiven Grunwald and wants to be part of her life when she’s released.

“I said, you can’t live with me, but I want to be a part of your life when you get out, and I want us to stay in touch. I am your biggest cheerleader, and I want to see you find your happy like I did, because I never thought I’d be happy, and here I am happier than I’ve ever been in my life, and I want her to find that. And we talked about what her dreams are, what her passions are, how she wants to give back to the community, to people, across the board, including veterans and first responders,” Wride-Zeeman said.

Wride-Zeeman says 100 percent she has forgiven Grunwald and wants nothing but the brightest of futures for her.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading

Utah

Utah Supreme Court considers defamation lawsuit over ‘Sound of Freedom’ movie

Published

on

Utah Supreme Court considers defamation lawsuit over ‘Sound of Freedom’ movie


SALT LAKE CITY — The state’s top court is considering whether to allow a defamation lawsuit to move forward over the movie “Sound of Freedom” and its portrayal of a villain in the movie.

On Wednesday, the Utah Supreme Court heard an appeal by Angel Studios, the filmmakers who created “Sound of Freedom” and Operation Underground Railroad founder Tim Ballard. They are being sued by Kely Suarez, who alleges the central villain character in the movie has defamed her and ruined her reputation.

Cherise Bacalski, Suarez’s attorney, said the character of “Katy Giselle” in the film is “a kingpin sex trafficker.”

“And she never was,” Bacalksi said of her client.

Advertisement

Before the Utah Supreme Court, Bacalski argued Suarez was a college student who was caught up in a raid that Ballard was involved with in Colombia.

A lower court allowed Suarez’s lawsuit to move toward trial. The studio and Ballard have appealed, arguing they are protected under a Utah law designed to safeguard speech and that the film is a docudrama that is “based on a true story.” The justices grilled lawyers for all sides about the level of involvement each party had and whether promotion of the film crossed any lines.

“Here it’s alleged the movie itself was defamatory and Angel Studios is the one who is putting out the movie,” Justice Paige Petersen said during Wednesday’s hearing.

Robert Gutierrez, an attorney for Angel Studios, insisted to the court that while the film may be based on Ballard’s experiences, there were disclaimers in the film.

“The Katy Giselle character was, in fact, a composite character in order to make it a subject matter the viewing public could actually watch,” he argued. “And fulfill the writer’s mission about the ugly truth of child trafficking.”

Advertisement

The justices questioned where the line is in a “docudrama” or when things are “based on a true story.”

“So under your definition is this a movie of and concerning Mr. Ballard? Or is that they happen to use the same name?” asked Justice John Nielsen.

Gutierrez replied it was a story “inspired by Tim Ballard.” Later in arguments, he noted that Suarez had actually been convicted of criminal charges in Colombia. That was something Bacalski said was not properly before the court and she argued against the veracity of it.

“We also believe the conviction is unreliable, coming from Colombia and really under suspicious circumstances,” she told FOX 13 News outside of court. “That conviction would not likely stand because of the constitutional protections we enjoy in the United States of America.”

Ballard’s attorney, Mark Eisenhut, argued that his client was not involved in the movie-making itself. Ballard was consulted as the film was being created.

Advertisement

“I do not believe there’s any evidence of him producing, writing, directing, anything of that nature,” Eisenhut argued.

The justices took the case under advisement with no timeline for a ruling. The movie, which starred Jim Caviezel as Ballard, went on to become a box office success in 2023.

“She’s very hopeful our justice system will do her justice,” Bacalski said of Suarez outside court.

Ballard faced a number of lawsuits and accusations of misconduct that led to ties being cut with Operation Underground Railroad, the anti-human trafficking organization he founded. He has denied wrongdoing and filed his own defamation lawsuit against some of his accusers.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending