Hey DOGE, Look at Utah’s Lawsuit to Stop This Spending3 min read

By Casey O. Anderson, For Iron County Today

On August 20th, 2024 Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes, with the support of Governor Spencer Cox and the Utah Legislature, filed a groundbreaking lawsuit against the federal government. The case challenges the constitutionality of federal control over 18.5 million acres of “unappropriated” land in Utah. These lands, managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), remain completely undesignated and without purpose unlike lands for specific purposes like parks, forests, or defense. 

Utah argues that the current arrangement forces the federal government to waste taxpayer dollars on land Utah doesn’t want locked up. The numbers are staggering. The BLM spends approximately $190 million annually managing these lands in Utah. On top of that, an additional $15 million a year flows to local jurisdictions through Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILT), compensating them for lost property tax revenue. 

If Utah wins, the implications could be massive. Not only would Utah take over management and financial responsibility for these lands, but the federal government could also achieve significant savings. This idea aligns perfectly with the mission of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE)—a proposed federal initiative aimed at cutting unnecessary (and in this case unwanted) spending. By relinquishing responsibility of these lands and their associated costs, the federal government could save an estimated $2 billion over the next decade.

Utah isn’t alone in its frustrations. Western states with similarly vast tracts of federally managed land look to Utah’s lawsuit as a model. If other states join the effort, the savings could multiply. Nationwide, the BLM’s budget hovers around $1.7 billion annually, and PILT payments to local governments push that figure to $2 billion.

The irony is rich: Utah is suing the federal government to stop spending money on Utah. When states actively reject federal funding, it seems like a no-brainer for DOGE to step in and cut the expense. Why wait for the Supreme Court to weigh in when a practical solution is already on the table?  Utah is even paying for a public relations campaign to support the effort.  This relationship is not working for anyone.

To reinforce its position, the Utah Legislature should take the next step: pass a formal resolution declaring the State’s intent to manage these lands and urging DOGE to act. This resolution could be sent directly to Washington DC, making it clear that Utah neither wants nor needs the federal government’s costly oversight. 

The lawsuit is expected to succeed because federal law clearly states that land cannot remain unappropriated indefinitely. Under longstanding legal principles and precedents, lands not designated for specific purposes must be transferred. Utah’s lawsuit argues that the federal government’s indefinite retention of these lands violates this mandate.

Utah is prepared to take on the responsibility of managing these lands—and the associated costs. This approach reflects a broader commitment to self-reliance and fiscal prudence.  At a time when every dollar counts, relinquishing federal control over unappropriated lands is the lowest-hanging fruit imaginable. States like Utah are essentially begging Washington to let them take over. DOGE, if it exists to find and implement savings, should take note. Cutting the BLM’s budget and associated PILT payments could free up $2 billion annually for other priorities—or help reduce the federal deficit.

Utah’s argument is compelling, and federal law backs it up. By passing a resolution and sending it to DOGE, Utah can further solidify its stance, offering a clear path to fiscal responsibility for the federal government. It’s time to listen, DOGE. Utah doesn’t want this money spent on Utah, and neither should you.