Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Lands Jurisdiction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House adopts resolution asking Congress to relinquish title and jurisdiction of BLM lands to Utah after amendment
Summary
The House passed HJR39 calling on Congress to relinquish right, title and jurisdiction over certain federal public lands to Utah. Lawmakers debated legal history, proposed a wording amendment to change 'has jurisdiction' to 'claims jurisdiction,' and passed the amendment and final resolution (61–9).
The Utah House on March 2 adopted a joint resolution (HJR39) urging Congress to restore title, right and jurisdiction of Bureau of Land Management lands to the state of Utah, a move supporters described as asserting the state’s sovereign claims over public lands.
Representative Barris introduced the resolution with an extended floor statement that traced early statehood enabling‑act language and criticized federal land‑management policies as departing from early expectations of disposal and multiple‑use. Barris said federal retention of large tracts had injured state sovereignty and constrained local economies and resource development.
Representative Christiansen offered a friendly amendment to alter the resolution’s phrasing — replacing the words 'has jurisdiction' with 'claims jurisdiction' — and to add a whereas clause stating that "Utah fully reserves and asserts all sovereign and constitutional claims to its public lands." The amendment’s supporters framed it as a protective drafting change to avoid unintended legal admissions while preserving the resolution’s intent. Representatives debated the legal reading of the Utah Enabling Act and the implications of FLPMA (the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976). Some members warned the language could affect future litigation; others said a formal assertion of claims was necessary.
The amendment passed by voice vote and the House subsequently passed HJR39 by recorded tally reported in the transcript as 61 yes and 9 no. Sponsors said the governor and the attorney general supported the resolution and encouraged follow‑up actions to pursue the state’s claims.
The resolution is a declaratory political statement and does not itself transfer property or jurisdiction; it requests congressional action and signals state officials to pursue legal or political follow‑up.
