• The Texas Public Policy Foundation filed a lawsuit challenging the legality of the Chuckwalla National Monument designation, claiming Biden overstepped his authority under the Antiquities Act.
• The lawsuit argues the monument's size violates the Antiquities Act's provision that monuments be limited to the smallest area necessary for protection.
• Supporters of the monument argue that it protects important tribal lands, wildlife habitats, and historical military sites, and that similar large-scale designations have been made in the past.

A lawsuit has been filed against the U.S. Department of the Interior by the Texas Public Policy Foundation on behalf of a Michigan resident with mining claims and the BlueRibbon Coalition, challenging President Biden's designation of the Chuckwalla National Monument in Southern California. The plaintiffs argue that the 624,000-acre monument exceeds the authority granted by the Antiquities Act of 1906. This legal challenge raises questions about the scope of presidential power in designating national monuments and has implications for land use, conservation, and recreation in the California desert.

• What: A lawsuit filed against the U.S. Department of the Interior challenges the designation of the Chuckwalla National Monument.
• Who: The plaintiffs are represented by the Texas Public Policy Foundation and include Daniel Torongo, a miner, and the BlueRibbon Coalition. Key figures include President Biden, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, Matt Miller (attorney for the Texas Public Policy Foundation), and Janessa Goldbeck (chief executive of Vet Voice Foundation).
• When: President Biden designated the monument on January 14, 2025. The lawsuit was filed on May 1, 2025.
• Where: The Chuckwalla National Monument is located in the Southern California desert, south of Joshua Tree National Park. The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

The lawsuit against the Chuckwalla National Monument hinges on the interpretation of the Antiquities Act and the extent of presidential authority in designating national monuments. The plaintiffs argue that the monument's size exceeds the limits intended by the Act, while supporters contend that such large-scale designations have historical precedent and are necessary for effective conservation. The outcome of the litigation could have significant implications for future monument designations and the management of public lands. The reference to the Trump administration's actions regarding other national monuments highlights the political nature of these designations and the potential for reversals depending on the administration in power. The mention of a possible Supreme Court review underscores the importance and potential far-reaching consequences of this case.

If you look at the history, it was supposed to be limited to, let’s say, 100 acres, maybe 1,000 acres. But it certainly wasn’t the kind of expansion that we’ve seen in recent years.

We have a Texas special interest group representing a guy from Michigan trying to undo something that Californians love and fought for.

The legal challenge to the Chuckwalla National Monument signifies a pivotal moment for President Biden's environmental agenda and sparks a broader debate concerning the application and constitutional limits of the Antiquities Act. The lawsuit, initiated by the Texas Public Policy Foundation, questions the president's authority in designating the 624,000-acre monument and argues that the Antiquities Act is unconstitutional. This legal battle, potentially headed for the Supreme Court, highlights the tensions between conservation goals, recreational access, and resource extraction, particularly mining interests. The outcome will not only determine the fate of the Chuckwalla National Monument but also set a precedent for future conservation efforts and the scope of executive power in protecting federal lands under the Antiquities Act. While some স্থানীয় communities voice concerns over restricted access and economic impacts, others, like the Coachella Valley Chamber of Commerce and various Tribal leaders, support the monument for its ecological and economic benefits, emphasizing the importance of preserving cultural heritage and ensuring sustainable tourism. The controversy underscores the ongoing struggle to balance environmental protection with competing interests in the American West and the enduring debate over the appropriate use of public lands.