Utah is far from the first Western state to pick a public lands fight with the federal government. But its direct petition to the U.S. Supreme Court to gain control over millions of acres is certainly an escalation.
And it’s one that got people throwing around another piece of history: The Utah Enabling Act of 1894. It’s the act of Congress that paved the way for statehood.
Land issues in the West date back to the 1800s and the documents that have controlled how land transfers from the federal government are handled go back to the original 13 colonies. Public lands are a “uniquely American issue,” said University of Utah history professor Gregory Smoak.
“Before the American Revolution and before the founding of the United States, this concept of a public domain really didn't exist.”
The need for a uniform way to handle land claims was made clear soon after the United States became a country. Smoak said some states had claims that extended to the Mississippi River or “theoretically to the western ocean.”
“Other states had no claims whatsoever and this was a hitch for ratifying the Articles of Confederation, the first form of government of the United States.”
That led to the Land Ordinance of 1785. States ceded their claims to Western land and established a process by which the federal government could sell the land it controlled west of the Appalachian Mountains. When they weren’t granting the land to the states, they were selling it to private citizens who went on to settle that land.
”The way to characterize federal land law throughout the 19th century and into the 20th century is it is focused on the transfer of the public domain into private hands, not to the states, per se,” Smoak said.

In the American West, states like Utah were territories of federal land before they were admitted to the Union. When the Utah Territory was formed on Sept. 9, 1850, it was made up of land the federal government acquired from Mexico in 1848 and another portion purchased from Texas. The territory was further sliced up as Colorado, Nevada, Idaho and Wyoming were organized.
At issue now is how much of the land inside Utah’s borders is still under federal control. When Utah became a state in 1896, it was given approximately 7.5 million acres to develop on its own (Utah in total is 54,340,240 acres).
“Those lands were given to support the state and develop schools, to build hospitals, to support construction of a capital and to do those kinds of things,” said John Ruple, a law professor at the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law.
“At the time, the federal government was land rich but cash poor, so it was very common for them to give land to newly minted states.”
There was a limit to how much land the state itself could control. The Utah Enabling Act of 1894 states that Utah “shall not be entitled to any further or other grants of land for any purpose” than what was expressly given to them in the document.
“There was no state land until the federal government created a state,” Ruple said.
“So when we hear people talk about Utah taking back land, it doesn't make a whole lot of historical sense, because Utah didn't own that land prior to federal acquisition.”
When Gov. Spencer Cox and Attorney General Sean Reyes announced their landmark lawsuit over federal land, the Center for Western Priorities, a nonpartisan conservation advocate, was quick to cite another part of the Enabling Act in their criticism.
“One-hundred-and-thirty years ago, the people of Utah agreed to ‘forever disclaim all right and title’ to national public lands when Utah became a state,” said Deputy Director Aaron Weiss in a statement. “What part of ‘forever’ isn’t clear to you, governor?”
For Ruple, the arguments being made in 2024 are that “the property clause of the federal Constitution prohibits the federal government from retaining certain lands in federal ownership indefinitely.”
“Under Utah's theory of the case, the United States government is now obligated to dispose of those lands,” he said. “The assumption underneath that is in disposing of those lands, the federal government would give them to the state of Utah, and the state would administer those consistent with its policies.”
What makes this public land fight different than those of the past is how Utah is trying to go about receiving those lands from the federal government. The arguments are similar to what Utah and other states have made before, Ruple said. However, the “framing here is slightly different in trying to … force disposal — disposal in kind of a broad, undefined term — rather than necessarily demand transfer of title to the state.”
Ruple agrees with Cox that “decisions regarding management of federal lands have a direct impact on our economy and our quality of life.”
“But that's not the same as saying that Utah owns or controls all of those lands. We need to work with our federal partners, and I fear that this kind of litigation drives a wedge rather than brings folks together, and I fear that it will make it more difficult to collaborate.”
Utah is bypassing lower courts in its effort to control this land by using original jurisdiction to petition the Supreme Court directly. The court still has to decide whether or not it will even take up the case. The next Supreme Court term starts on Oct. 7, 2024.