|
|
Andrus v. Utah, 446 U.S. 500 (1980)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Andrus v. Utah, 446 U.S. 500 (1980)
Andrus v. Utah No. 78-1522 Argued December 5, 1979 Decided May 19, 1980 446 U.S. 500
CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Section 7 of the Taylor Grazing Act, as amended in 1936, authorizes the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary), in his discretion, to classify, as proper not only for homesteading but also for satisfaction of any outstanding "lieu" rights, both lands within federal grazing districts and any unappropriated and unreserved public lands withdrawn by Executive Order from "settlement, location, sale or entry" pending a determination of the best use of the lands, and to open all such lands to "selection." Section 7 further provides that such lands shall not be subject to disposition until they have been classified. Pursuant to § 7, the Secretary refused Utah’s selection of extremely valuable oil shale lands located within federal grazing districts in lieu of and as indemnification for original school land grants of significantly lesser value that were frustrated by federal preemption or private entry prior to being surveyed. In so acting, the Secretary followed the policy that, in the exercise of his discretion under § 7, indemnity applications involving grossly disparate values would be refused. Utah filed suit in Federal District Court, which, upon stipulated facts, entered summary judgment for the State. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that § 7 gave the Secretary no authority to classify land as eligible for selection, and that Utah had a right to select indemnity land of equal acreage without regard to the relative values of the original school land grants and the indemnity selections.
Held: Section 7 confers on the Secretary the authority, in his discretion, to classify lands within a federal grazing district as proper for school indemnity selection. His "grossly disparate value" policy is a lawful exercise of the broad discretion vested in him by § 7, and is a valid ground for refusing to accept Utah’s selections. Such policy is wholly faithful to Congress’ consistent purpose, in providing for indemnity selections, of giving the States a rough equivalent of the school land grants in place that were lost through preemption or private entry prior to survey. Pp. 506-520.
586 F.2d 756, reversed.
STEVENS, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which BRENNAN, STEWART, WHITE, and MARSHALL, JJ., joined. POWELL, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which BURGER, C.J., and BLACKMUN and REHNQUIST, JJ., joined, post, p. 520.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Andrus v. Utah, 446 U.S. 500 (1980) in 446 U.S. 500 446 U.S. 501. Original Sources, accessed November 24, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=UY22DQZKLSQUX54.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Andrus v. Utah, 446 U.S. 500 (1980), in 446 U.S. 500, page 446 U.S. 501. Original Sources. 24 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=UY22DQZKLSQUX54.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Andrus v. Utah, 446 U.S. 500 (1980). cited in 1980, 446 U.S. 500, pp.446 U.S. 501. Original Sources, retrieved 24 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=UY22DQZKLSQUX54.
|