Patagonia Files Lawsuit Challenging Trump’s Reduction of Bears Ears National Monument

Outdoor apparel giant Patagonia has joined forces with conservation and tribal organizations to file a lawsuit against President Trump, aiming to reverse his decision to reduce Bears Ears National Monument in southern Utah by over one million acres.

This legal action escalates Patagonia’s long-standing conflict with Mr. Trump, a dispute that originated during his first term and evolved into a central element of the company’s corporate strategy. It also initiates a broad legal debate over whether U.S. presidents possess the authority to diminish such protected sites.

In July, Mr. Trump signed a proclamation that reduced Bears Ears by 91 percent, an area of red-rock canyons abundant in archaeologically significant sites, shrinking it by more than 1.2 million acres. He also decreased the size of a second southern Utah monument, Grand Staircase-Escalante, by nearly 1.7 million acres, representing a 90 percent reduction.

These reductions exposed vast stretches of desert terrain to oil drilling, uranium mining, and various other forms of development. Records indicate that companies have already filed at least nine mining claims within the areas stripped from both monuments.

However, the lawsuit contends that the Antiquities Act of 1906—the legislation governing national monuments—empowers presidents to designate these sites but does not grant them the authority to reduce their size.

Ryan Gellert, Patagonia’s chief executive, stated in an interview that the current climate makes it “difficult” for businesses to confront Mr. Trump, who has leveraged federal power to penalize law firms, universities, and other institutions.

Nevertheless, he emphasized that resistance “is more needed now than ever,” adding, “I believe this administration, during its 19 or 20 months in office, has been entirely focused on launching a whole-of-government assault on nature and the natural world.”

A Justice Department spokesman declined to comment on the lawsuit, which was filed in Federal District Court in Washington. Taylor Rogers, a White House spokeswoman, refrained from directly addressing the litigation but stated in an email that “the Obama and Biden administrations abused the Antiquities Act to lock up millions of acres of Utah’s public lands.”

The complaint asserts that Patagonia has legal standing to sue because its employees and customers utilize Bears Ears for various activities, including product testing and recreation. If the court determines that at least one plaintiff possesses standing, the case will proceed.

This mirrors the situation in 2017, when Patagonia was part of a coalition that sued the first Trump administration over the identical issue. Although the government challenged the company’s standing, the court permitted the case to advance. It remained pending when President Joseph R. Biden Jr. succeeded Mr. Trump and restored the monument’s boundaries in 2021.

Sean Buchanan, an associate professor of business administration at the University of Manitoba who has studied Patagonia’s activism, suggested the lawsuit would likely benefit its business. He noted that the company experienced one of its most profitable years in 2017, coinciding with its initial filing of such a complaint.

“That served as a signal to them that they can engage in seemingly risky corporate activism that might alienate some customers without facing punishment,” he explained. “The rationale is that there is a sufficient customer base that supports suing the Trump administration, and rather than boycotting the brand, they will engage in what we call a ‘buy-cott.’”

National monuments are lands legally protected from development. While similar to national parks, they differ in their creation process: national parks are established by Congress, whereas national monuments can be established via executive action.

Alongside Patagonia, the plaintiffs include the Conservation Lands Foundation, an environmental organization, and A’Nuche, a nonprofit led by members of the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe. Bears Ears serves as the ancestral homeland of the Ute Mountain Ute and four other regional tribes.

Deena Ute, the executive director of A’Nuche, stated that her ancestors inhabited the area for centuries before the federal government forcibly removed them in 1923. She remarked that Mr. Trump’s proclamations amounted to “more erasure of us and who we are as a people.”

Ms. Ute also expressed concern that mining operations and vandalism could irreparably damage artifacts such as burial grounds and rock art.

“Destroying these sites is easy, but recovering them is incredibly difficult,” she noted.

The lawsuit specifically challenged the decision to shrink Bears Ears. Separate complaints aimed at restoring the boundaries of Grand Staircase-Escalante were filed by other environmental organizations, including the Natural Resources Defense Council.

President Barack Obama originally designated Bears Ears in 2016. The monument is named for a pair of buttes—flat-topped hills—that rise thousands of feet above the surrounding canyons, dominating the nearby landscape.

President Bill Clinton designated Grand Staircase in 1996, effectively halting plans for a coal mining project at the site. The monument is named for a sequence of sedimentary rock layers filled with fossils, including the preserved remains of dinosaurs that roamed the region over 74 million years ago.

During his first term in 2017, Mr. Trump reduced the size of both monuments at the urging of top Utah Republicans. These actions were later reversed by Mr. Biden, who granted sweeping protections to both sites.

The suits filed on Wednesday seek to reinstate the 2017 litigation. However, some environmental lawyers worry the cases could ultimately reach the Supreme Court, where the conservative majority might rule that previous presidents abused the Antiquities Act. Such a ruling could have far-reaching consequences beyond Utah, potentially stripping protections from millions of additional acres nationwide.

Rob Tadlock, Patagonia’s deputy general counsel, stated that the company had anticipated this scenario. However, he noted, the company concluded that “the risk of doing nothing is greater than the risk of taking on this challenge.”

Mr. Trump’s executive orders targeting major law firms and other corporations have compelled some entities to acquiesce to his demands. Conversely, other firms have successfully challenged the administration’s tactics.

For Patagonia, however, this is hardly the company’s first clash with the president over public lands.

When Mr. Trump reduced the Utah monuments during his first term, Patagonia protested the decision directly on its website. Instead of its usual promotions for colorful clothing, the site displayed a stark message—”the president stole your land”—against a black background.

Prior to the 2020 election, the company made another political statement. On the underside of the tags of certain shorts, it inserted a message urging consumers to vote against politicians who denied the reality of climate change.

More recently, Patagonia has faced legal opposition from an unexpected adversary. In January, the company sued Pattie Gonia, a drag queen and environmental activist, for trademark infringement, alleging she used its name for commercial purposes.

Some customers criticized the lawsuit on social media, characterizing it as an attempt to silence the activist. Mr. Tadlock stated that the company had hoped to avoid such a complaint and was eager to reach a resolution.

A spokesperson for Mx. Gonia declined to comment.

Source link