US judge halts plan to transfer Oak Flat land for contested Arizona copper mine
Apache Stronghold and its supporters have been fighting for years to stop the transfer of Tonto National Forest land known as Oak Flat to Resolution Copper. Meanwhile, the company has touted the economic benefits for the region and says it's worked with Native American tribes and others to shape the project.
U.S. District Judge Steven Logan said halting the land transfer would merely delay the production of copper and jobs and revenue to Arizona if it's ultimately upheld. On the other hand, he said Apaches would lose legal access to an ancestral, sacred site if the transfer proceeded.
He said the balance of equities 'tips sharply' in favor of Apache Stronghold. He granted an injunction that will be in place until the U.S. Supreme Court resolves an appeal to reconsider a decision from a panel of judges that refused to block the land transfer for the mine.
Logan, however, denied Apache Stronghold's request to have the injunction extend beyond the Supreme Court's resolution of the case.
'We are grateful the judge stopped this land grab in its tracks so that the Supreme Court has time to protect Oak Flat from destruction,' Wendsler Nosie Sr. of Apache Stronghold said in a statement Friday.
Winnipeg Jets Game Days
On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop.
A statement from Resolution Cooper said the ruling simply maintains the status quo and anticipates the U.S. Supreme Court will decide soon whether to take up the case.
The fight over Oak Flat dates back about 20 years, when legislation proposing the land transfer was first introduced. It failed repeatedly in Congress before being included in a must-pass national defense spending bill in 2014.
President Donald Trump in his first administration released an environmental review that would trigger the land transfer. Former President Joe Biden pulled it back so the federal government could consult further with tribes.
Then, the U.S. Forest Service in April announced it would forge ahead with the land transfer, prompting Apache Stronghold's emergency appeal.
Apache Stronghold sued the U.S. government in 2021 under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to protect the place tribal members call Chi'chil Bildagoteel, an area dotted with ancient oak groves and traditional plants the Apaches consider essential to their religion.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vancouver Sun
11 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Conservatives aiming to amend Criminal Code so immigration status won't be a factor in sentencing
When Parliament resumes this fall, a Conservative MP says her party will introduce legislation to end consideration of immigration status when a judge is sentencing a convicted criminal who is not a citizen. Michelle Rempel Garner, MP for Calgary Nose Hill and shadow minister for Immigration, said the practice has essentially resulted in a two-tier justice system that allows non-citizens to get lighter sentences than Canadians convicted of the same crime. 'This offends all principles of fairness that should be foundational to our justice system,' Rempel Garner said at a press conference in Ottawa on Wednesday. She pointed to a 2013 Supreme Court of Canada decision that she says has permitted judges to consider immigration status at the sentencing stage of a case. In that case, R. v. Pham , the accused was a non‑citizen, convicted of two drug‑related offences. The trial judge imposed a sentence of two years' imprisonment. However, the Supreme Court noted that under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, a non‑citizen sentenced to a term of imprisonment of at least two years loses the right to appeal a removal order against him or her. In reducing Pham's sentence, the Supreme Court ruled that 'collateral immigration consequences' are relevant factors that a sentencing judge may take into account in determining an appropriate sentence, but added that those consequences should not influence whether or not deportation occurs. Rempel Garner cited a few recent cases that relied on the Pham ruling in handing down a sentence. In the first example, a permanent resident was convicted of trying to buy sex from a police officer posing as a 15-year-old in an online sting operation. The Crown sought a 90-day jail sentence. Ontario Court judge Paul O'Marra wrote that a criminal record would likely prevent the offender from sponsoring his wife to also become a permanent resident, as well as delay the offender's eligibility for Canadian citizenship and jeopardize his ability to become a licensed engineer. O'Marra concluded that 'a custodial sentence would be unduly harsh' and instead handed down a conditional discharge with 12 months of probation, which included three months of house arrest. In establishing the basis for his reasoning, he wrote: 'The Pham decision stands for the principle that collateral consequences, while not determinative, can justify a lower sentence within the legal range to avoid disproportionate hardship,' In an Alberta case cited by Rempel Garner, a man in Canada on a visitor's permit was accused of groping an 18-year-old woman in a nightclub twice. The judge ruled that 'in consideration of the devastating collateral immigration consequences to recording a conviction, I conclude that the appropriate sentence for Mr. Singh is a conditional discharge with a probation order of maximum duration, 3 years.' Rempel Garner insists that when 'it comes to sentencing non-citizens, Canada has essentially adopted a system of two-tier justice where judges can and have given lighter sentences to individuals who are non-citizens.' The Conservatives are proposing a bill that would prohibit immigration discounts in sentencing. Great news! Courts have been more lenient on non-citizens since 2013, at times going light on sex offenders to help them remain in Canada. That can change if Parliament wills it. Rempel Garner said the Conservatives intend to introduce legislation to amend the Criminal Code. 'Our bill will add a section after Section 718.202 … which will expressly outline that any potential impact of a sentence on the immigration status of a convicted non-citizen offender, or … their family members, should not be taken into consideration by a judge when issuing a sentence.' Acknowledging that the vast majority of immigrants and temporary residents in Canada abide by the law, she said 'removing non-citizens convicted of serious crimes is a no-brainer. Conservatives will always fight to protect Canadians, the value of our citizenship and the safety of every person who lives here. Becoming a Canadian is a privilege, not a right.' Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
Winnipeg Free Press
12 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
New Mexico governor declares state of emergency in rural county afflicted by crime, drug use
SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — The governor of New Mexico declared a state of emergency Wednesday in response to violent crime and drug trafficking across a swath of northern New Mexico, including two Native American pueblo communities. The emergency declaration by Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham makes $750,000 available in response to calls by local governments and tribal officials in Rio Arriba County for reinforcements against violent crime as well as other crime and hardships associated with illicit drugs. The vast area stretches from the city of Española, 25 miles (40 kilometers) north of Santa Fe, to the Colorado state line and has long been afflicted by opioid use and high drug-overdose death rates, with homeless encampments emerging in recent years in more populated areas. 'The surge in criminal activity has contributed to increased homelessness, family instability and fatal drug overdoses, placing extraordinary strain on local governments and police departments that have requested immediate state assistance,' Lujan Grisham said in a statement. In April, Lujan Grisham declared a state of emergency in New Mexico's largest city, Albuquerque, saying that a significant increase in crime in Albuquerque warrants the help of the New Mexico National Guard. There were no immediate calls for troop deployments in Rio Arriba County, though the new emergency declaration allows for authorities to call up the National Guard. The tribal governor of Santa Clara Pueblo on the edge of Española urged the state to address a growing public safety crisis stemming from the use and abuse of fentanyl and alcohol in the community at large. 'The pueblo has expended thousands of dollars trying to address this crisis … and to protect pueblo children who are directly and negatively affected by a parent's or guardian's addiction,' said Santa Clara Gov. James Naranjo in a July letter to Lujan Grisham. 'But we are not an isolated community and the causes and effects of fentanyl/alcohol abuse, increased crime, and increased homelessness extend to the wider community.' In 2020, President Donald Trump sent federal agents, including Homeland Security officers, to Albuquerque as part of an effort to contain violent crime.
Edmonton Journal
12 hours ago
- Edmonton Journal
Families whose ancestors gave up Indigenous status sue to have rights restored
Article content VANCOUVER — A proposed class-action lawsuit filed in Federal Court says the Canadian government wrongfully denies people status under the country's Indian Act if their ancestors 'voluntarily' gave up Indigenous status under laws that predate Confederation. Article content Plaintiffs Charles Wesley, Christopher Wesley, Sharon Nicholas and Nicole Nicholas filed a statement of claim in Vancouver this month seeking damages from the federal government for 'being deprived of the benefits' of status under the act. Article content Article content Article content The claim says they all have 'at least one direct ancestor' who was 'enfranchised' under Canadian law, where they gave up their status and received the rights and privileges of Canadian citizenship. Article content Article content The lawsuit says their 'family history of enfranchisement' means they and their children and grandchildren are not eligible to register for status, depriving them of 'tangible economic, educational, and health benefits of Indian status.' Article content The claim says the federal government has already 'conceded' that the act's registration provisions are unconstitutional in a legal challenge filed by Sharon Nicholas and Nicole Nicholas in B.C. Supreme Court, a case heard earlier this year with a decision pending. Article content The claims says it is 'misleading' to refer to enfranchisement as voluntary because it was often done 'under considerable duress' because it spared their children from residential schooling, and women and children were also automatically enfranchised if their husbands or fathers applied. Article content
