The Legal Status of U.S. National Monument Reductions

The federal government holds the authority to designate national monuments under the Antiquities Act of 1906, but the legal capacity for a president to shrink existing monuments remains a subject of intense litigation. While Congress clearly possesses the power to alter monument boundaries, the executive branch’s authority to unilaterally reduce them—most notably seen in the 2017 boundary adjustments to Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante—has sparked ongoing debate over the scope of presidential power.

The 2017 Executive Action and Legal Challenges

In December 2017, President Donald Trump signed two proclamations that significantly reduced the size of two national monuments in Utah. Proclamation 9681 reduced the Bears Ears National Monument by approximately 1.15 million acres, while Proclamation 9682 reduced the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument by nearly 900,000 acres. These actions collectively removed roughly two million acres from federal monument protections.

The administration justified these reductions by citing the Antiquities Act, which grants the president authority to reserve public lands as national monuments. The Department of the Interior argued that the original designations were overly broad and failed to prioritize the “smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected,” as required by the statute. Opponents, including a coalition of tribal nations and environmental organizations, filed multiple lawsuits arguing that the Antiquities Act does not grant the president the implied authority to revoke or reduce monument designations once established.

Restoration of Monument Boundaries

The legal battles over these boundaries shifted in 2021 when President Joe Biden issued Proclamation 10285 and Proclamation 10286. These orders restored the original boundaries of both Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante, effectively reversing the 2017 reductions. The Biden administration maintained that the 2017 modifications were inconsistent with the intent of the Antiquities Act and failed to protect the cultural and ecological resources identified in the original designations.

Because the boundaries were restored before the courts reached a final ruling on the merits of the 2017 executive actions, the core legal question—whether a president possesses the inherent power to shrink a monument—remains unresolved in federal case law. Legal scholars note that while the Supreme Court has previously upheld the president’s power to create monuments, it has never explicitly ruled on the power to diminish them.

Understanding the Antiquities Act

The Antiquities Act is the primary tool used by presidents to protect federal land. Since its passage in 1906, it has been used to establish over 150 national monuments. The law contains two critical components that define its application:

• The “Smallest Area” Clause: The Act mandates that reservations be confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.
• Congressional Authority: The Constitution’s Property Clause (Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2) grants Congress the power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.

Because the Property Clause gives Congress primary control over federal lands, any executive action that modifies these lands is subject to judicial review. If a future administration attempts to reduce monument boundaries again, the legal precedent—or lack thereof—regarding the 2017 and 2021 actions will likely serve as the foundation for the resulting litigation.

Key Takeaways

• Unresolved Authority: There is no definitive Supreme Court precedent confirming that a president has the legal authority to shrink a national monument once it has been designated.
• Executive Reversals: The rapid shifts between the 2017 reductions and the 2021 restorations demonstrate how monument boundaries can be subject to the policy priorities of changing presidential administrations.
• Congressional Primacy: While the Antiquities Act delegates power to the president, constitutional scholars generally agree that Congress retains the ultimate authority to modify or abolish monument protections through legislation.