Gorsuch, Thomas dissent as Supreme Court declines to take up Apache challenge to copper mine
The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to take up a challenge to a land swap enabling mining at a sacred indigenous site, garnering pushback from conservative justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas.
A 2014 law enabled a land transfer between mining company Resolution Copper and the federal government, allowing the miner to take control of a site called Oak Flat in Arizona, which is sacred to the Western Apache.
A group called Apache Stronghold, which says it represents Apaches, other Native peoples, and non-Native allies, appealed the case to the Supreme Court, asking it to reverse a Ninth Circuit decision on religious freedom grounds.
The high court declined to take up the case on Tuesday without explaining its decision. However, Gorsuch issued a dissent, joined by Thomas.
'For centuries, Western Apaches have worshipped at Chí'chil Biłdagoteel, or Oak Flat. They consider the site a sacred and 'direct corridor to the Creator,'' Gorsuch wrote. ' Now, the government and a mining conglomerate want to turn Oak Flat into a massive hole in the ground.'
'Before allowing the government to destroy the Apaches' sacred site, this Court should at least have troubled itself to hear their case,' he added.
Apache Stronghold said in its petition that Oak Flat 'is the site of religious ceremonies that cannot take place elsewhere' including ceremonies for boys entering manhood and girls entering womanhood.
For the court to take up a case, it needs at least four votes in favor of doing so. It's not clear whether any other justices voted with Gorsuch and Thomas, though Samuel Alito recused himself.
In its own filing, Resolution Copper argued that the court should not have take up the case because the land exchange was authorized by Congress and because Apache Stronghold is a nonprofit 'with no religious claim of its own and thus no standing' to bring the case.
Resolution Copper is a joint venture between mining companies Rio Tinto and BHP.
Zach Schonfeld contributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
an hour ago
- New York Times
Arkansas May Not Be Ready for a ‘Healing' Anti-Abortion Monument
On the grounds of the Arkansas State Capitol, just behind a large stone tablet etched with the Ten Commandments, is a grassy meadow designated for a second state-sanctioned project. This one, envisioned as a long wall of luscious green plants, will serve as Arkansas's 'Monument to Unborn Children.' In 2023, an artist named Lakey Goff won a public contest to design the state's official anti-abortion memorial. Her entry — which called for 1,400 plants and a Bible quotation, as well as the piped-in sounds of Arkansas waterfalls — stood out from a raft of more literal-minded entries featuring fetuses and infants. Ms. Goff has described her 'living wall' as a gesture of reconciliation after decades of conflict over abortion policy. 'We're not at war with each other anymore,' Ms. Goff said last year to the members of the state commission that chose her design. 'This is about healing.' But the monument remains unbuilt, months after work on it was supposed to start, not least because the debate over abortion has continued to rage. Even in one of the most conservative states in the nation, bitterness and discord remain, three years after the Supreme Court ended the constitutional right to abortion. Healing seems like a distant dream. Arkansas has long been hailed as the 'most pro-life state in America' by Americans United for Life, a leading anti-abortion group. On June 24, 2022, the day that Roe was overturned, the state enacted one of the strictest abortion bans in the country, with no exceptions for rape or incest. But last year, abortion rights activists gathered more than 100,000 signatures from many corners of the state for a ballot initiative that would have restored the right to an abortion up to 18 weeks after conception. Anti-abortion forces described the effort as 'radical' and countered with a statewide 'decline to sign' campaign. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Supreme Court backs Missouri, Kansas ban on gender transitions for children
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — On Wednesday, the United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of Missouri, Kansas and other states seeking to ban gender transition procedures. The ruling in United States v. Skrmetti reflects Missouri's law banning what Missouri Attorney General Andrew Bailey calls 'gender mutilation' procedures for minors. Bailey says that the state played a pivotal role in the ruling. 16-year-old boy killed in Basehor, Kansas crash: KHP In February, Kansas became the 27th state to ban or restrict such care when after barring federal support for gender-affirming care for youth under 19. Kelly vetoed the bill on Feb. 11, saying it's inappropriate for politicians to infringe on parental rights. One week later, on Feb. 18, the veto was reversed. 'My office has been on the front lines of the fight to stop the mutilation of children in the name of radical gender ideology,' Bailey said. 'Missouri was the first state in the nation to win on this issue, and the Supreme Court's decision affirms what we've said all along: states have both the right and the duty to protect children from these irreversible and experimental procedures.' Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach also released a statement on Wednesday, saying 'This decision is a big win for those of us who want to protect the original meaning of the Constitution. The 14th Amendment equal protection clause in no way prevents states from protecting minors in this contest. The decision also strengthens the state's position regarding Kansas's law. The Kansas equal protection clause must be interpreted in the same fashion as the U.S. equal protection clause. I look forward to defending the law in court.' Suspect dead, trooper injured after shooting in Saline County In the Skrmetti case, Bailey's office says that Missouri led 19 other states in asking the Supreme Court to allow states to ban gender transition practices. 'This is a victory not just for Missouri, but for every state fighting to shield children from irreversible harm disguised as medical care,' concluded Bailey. 'We are proud that the Supreme Court has now adopted the same position we've led on from day one: children deserve protection, not permanent damage. As a father and as Attorney General, I will not rest until every entity harming kids is shut down, every bad actor is held accountable, and Missouri remains the safest state in the nation for children.' Other local leaders joined in as well. U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, R-Kan., shared a statement praising the decision. 'Today was not just a win for basic biology and common sense, but for human decency, sound medicine, and the dignity and safety of children everywhere,' Marshall said. 'As a doctor for over 25 years, I understand the gravity of these harmful so-called treatments radical activists have been pushing on children. They leave permanent scarring, sterilization, and other horrible side effects. Make no mistake, there's more work to do, and I remain committed to eliminating taxpayer-funded transgender procedures on both minors and adults.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Politico
7 hours ago
- Politico
New Texas law requires 10 Commandments to be posted in every public school classroom
AUSTIN, Texas — Texas will require all public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments under a new law that will make the state the nation's largest to attempt to impose such a mandate. Gov. Greg Abbott announced Saturday that he signed the bill, which is expected to draw a legal challenge from critics who consider it an unconstitutional violation of the separation of church and state. A similar law in Louisiana was blocked when a federal appeals court ruled Friday that it was unconstitutional. Arkansas also has a similar law that has been challenged in federal court. The Texas measure easily passed in the Republican-controlled state House and Senate in the legislative session that ended June 2. 'The focus of this bill is to look at what is historically important to our nation educationally and judicially,' Republican state representative Candy Noble, a co-sponsor of the bill, said when it passed the House. Abbott also signed a bill that allows school districts to provide students and staff a daily voluntary period of prayer or time to read a religious text during school hours. The Ten Commandments laws are among efforts, mainly in conservative-led states, to insert religion into public schools. Texas' law requires public schools to post in classrooms a 16-by-20-inch poster or framed copy of a specific English version of the commandments, even though translations and interpretations vary across denominations, faiths and languages and may differ in homes and houses of worship. Supporters say the Ten Commandments are part of the foundation of the United States' judicial and educational systems and should be displayed. Opponents, including some Christian and other faith leaders, say the Ten Commandments and prayer measures infringe on others' religious freedom. A letter signed this year by dozens of Christian and Jewish faith leaders opposing the bill noted that Texas has thousands of students of other faiths who might have no connection to the Ten Commandments. Texas has nearly 6 million students in about 9,100 public schools. In 2005, Abbott, who was state attorney general at the time, successfully argued before the Supreme Court that Texas could keep a Ten Commandments monument on the grounds of its Capitol. Louisiana's law has twice been ruled unconstitutional by federal courts, first by U.S. District Judge John deGravelles and then again by a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which also considers cases from Texas. State Attorney General Liz Murrell said she would appeal and pledged to take it to the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.
