Candidates split on 'Stand for Our Lands' lawsuit and state advertising

Rep. Celeste Malloy told the Utah Tech University audience she supports the state’s effort to ask the U.S. Supreme Court whether the federal government may hold unappropriated public land "in perpetuity," and she defended state advertising that informs residents of the lawsuit. "The people of Utah have a right to know what the state's doing," Malloy said, and she described the state’s question to the Court as "fair" and worthy of judicial resolution.

Nathaniel Woodward said he is "hesitant to fully get on board" with a lawsuit against the federal government that carries combative rhetoric. Woodward said he supports transferring significant federal land to local control in principle, but he urged that local residents who live on public lands and institutions such as the State Institutional Trust Lands Administration should lead those efforts rather than developers or outside interests. "I would like to see this act led by people who live on the public lands," he said.

The candidates also answered whether state advertising is an appropriate use of taxpayer dollars. Malloy said a state that has filed a lawsuit is justified in spending to inform the public; Woodward said he supports informing residents but worried that the advertising "is coming with too much of the fluff and not enough of the neutral standpoint," and cautioned against using taxpayer money to "sell an agenda."

Both candidates distinguished types of federal land: Malloy emphasized the lawsuit targets "unappropriated land" and is not about national parks, national forests or monuments. Woodward highlighted the lived reality of people in counties where large shares of land are federally managed and urged local voices be central to any transfer decisions.

Why it matters: a U.S. Supreme Court decision and any subsequent transfers of federal land would reshape control over large tracts of public land in Utah, with implications for development, conservation, local governments and water use. Candidates’ positions indicate whether they would press federal policy toward states' claims or favor retaining federal management protections.