Two US Supreme Court Justices Dissent from Majority over Land Grab of Apache Sacred Site
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday denied to hear a petition made by the Apache Stronghold to prevent an undesired land swap allowing Resolution Copper to mine at the Oak Flat site, which holds religious significance for the Apache tribe. This denial came months after the Ninth Circuit Appeals Court closely ruled that the land could be mined based on a provision in a 2014 defense bill, leading Apache Stronghold to petition the Supreme Court thereafter.
Apache Stronghold is a non-profit group representing the Apache and other native tribes, along with allies to their causes.
The two dissenting justices were Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas. In his dissent from the Court’s decision, Gorsuch wrote that the majority was gravely mistaken and that the Court should have, at least, heard the tribe’s case:
“Apache Stronghold asks us to review the Ninth Circuit’s extraordinary conclusion. But the Court today turns aside the group’s request. Respectfully, that is a grave mistake,” Gorsuch wrote. “This case meets every one of the standards we usually apply when assessing petitions for certiorari: The decision below is highly doubtful as a matter of law, it takes a view of the law at odds with those expressed by other federal courts of appeals, and it is vitally important.”
“Before allowing the government to destroy the Apaches’ sacred site, this Court should at least have troubled itself to hear their case,” Gorsuch exclaimed.
Oak Flat is a site in Arizona’s Tonto National Forest. According to Gorsuch, it is “home to old-growth oak groves, sacred springs, burial locations, and a singular concentration of archaeological sites testifying to its persistent use for the past 1,500 years.” The tribe, being rooted in this land for over one thousand years, is unable to conduct its ceremonies elsewhere.
In 1995, a copper deposit was found beneath the site at Oak Flat, and was immediately sought by mining companies for copper extraction. Gorsuch wrote in further detail, “Two multinational mining companies, Rio Tinto and BHP, joined forces to form Resolution Copper, and together they began lobbying Congress for permission to mine the site.”
Wendsler Nosie, head of the Apache Stronghold, told the Arizona Republic that the tribe is determined to continue fighting for the site’s retention, saying “the struggle is long from over.”
On the other hand, the Resolution Copper Mine looks forward to supplying the US’s industrial needs through acquisition of the site:
“The Resolution Copper mine is vital to securing America’s energy future, infrastructure needs, and national defense with a domestic supply of copper and other critical minerals,” a spokesperson wrote after the Ninth Circuit Court’s decision. Resolution Copper further claims it can potentially “add $1 billion a year to Arizona’s economy, and create thousands of local jobs in a region where mining has played an important role for more than a century.”
Gorsuch doubled down, at the conclusion of his dissent, his opinion on the mistakenness of the majority’s decision to dismiss the case and the effects it could have in the future:
“While this Court enjoys the power to choose which cases it will hear, its decision to shuffle this case off our docket without a full airing is a grievous mistake—one with consequences that threaten to reverberate for generations. Just imagine if the government sought to demolish a historic cathedral on so questionable a chain of legal reasoning. I have no doubt that we would find that case worth our time.”
