Patagonia, tribes sue Trump over Utah monument shrink

Overview

Updated 6 days ago

Patagonia, five tribal nations, and environmental groups sued September 2 to block Trump's second shrink of Utah's Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante monuments. The case is before U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan. She is weighing whether to reopen a 2017 lawsuit that stalled after Biden restored the monuments.

The Supreme Court has never decided whether the Antiquities Act lets a president undo a predecessor's monument designation. The answer decides control of nearly three million acres — and whether the mining claims filed since July stand.

Why it matters

If the shrink stands, mining moves into protected red-rock country, and future presidents gain power to erase land protections at will.

Questions about this story

Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.

No questions yet — be the first to ask.

Key Indicators

90%

Reduction in each monument's size

Bears Ears fell to about 121,000 acres and Grand Staircase-Escalante to about 182,000 acres — deeper than Trump's 2017 cuts.

Monuments at stake

Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante, both created by Democratic presidents.

Mining claims filed since July

Claims filed on land that was protected until July. Some were staked before September 11, the earliest date the proclamations allow for new claims.

2.9M

Acres removed from protection

Combined area cut from the two monuments by the July proclamations.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

People Involved

Ryan Gellert

Chief executive, Patagonia

Leading the company's suit against the monument shrink

Spencer Cox

Governor of Utah

Supports the monument shrink

Angelo Baca

Tribal co-management advocate

Watched the shrink shelve years of co-management work

Tanya Chutkan

U.S. District Judge, District of Columbia

Presiding over the reopened Bears Ears and Grand Staircase lawsuit

Organizations Involved

Patagonia

Outdoor clothing and gear retailer

Filed a new suit over Bears Ears and joined the revived 2017 challenge

Ventura, California-based outdoor retailer that has become a frequent litigant against the administration's environmental policies.

U.S. Department of the Interior

Federal agency

Defending the monument shrink

Federal agency that manages public lands, including national monuments and the mineral rights beneath them.

Five tribal nations coalition

Indigenous nations alliance

Lead plaintiffs in the reopened lawsuit; the July proclamation ended their federal co-management agreement

The coalition that petitioned the Obama administration to create Bears Ears and negotiated its co-management.

Timeline

June 1906 September 2026

8 events Latest: September 2nd, 2026 · 1 week ago

Tap a bar to jump to that date

September 2026
Patagonia, tribes, greens file suit
Latest Legal

Plaintiffs argue the Antiquities Act gives presidents no power to undo a monument designation.
September 2nd, 2026
July 2026
Trump again shrinks the monuments
Proclamation

Each monument is cut by about 90 percent, opening millions of acres to mining and drilling.
July 13th, 2026
June 2026
Appeals court remands Grand Staircase case
Legal

The Tenth Circuit, in Garfield County v. Trump, sent a Utah challenge over Grand Staircase-Escalante back to the district court. The September filings in the D.C. case cite the ruling as grounds to reopen the stalled 2017 lawsuit.
June 23rd, 2026
October 2021
Biden restores the monuments
Proclamation

The original boundaries are restored; the 2017 litigation goes on hold.
October 8th, 2021
December 2017
Trump shrinks both monuments
Proclamation

Tribes and environmental groups immediately file suit challenging the reductions.
December 4th, 2017
December 2016
Obama creates Bears Ears
Proclamation

The first national monument created at the request of five tribal nations, spanning 1.35 million acres.
December 28th, 2016
September 1996
Clinton creates Grand Staircase-Escalante
Proclamation

The 1.7-million-acre monument is established in southern Utah over local opposition.
September 18th, 1996
June 1906
Roosevelt signs the Antiquities Act
Law

The law grants presidents power to protect federal lands and historic sites as national monuments.
June 8th, 1906

Scenarios

Court strikes down Trump's monument shrink

Likely Resolves by Jun 1, 2028

Discussed by: Plaintiffs' legal team and conservation groups, citing the 2021 district court ruling that the first shrink exceeded presidential authority

A federal judge grants an injunction restoring the monuments' boundaries while the case proceeds, then rules the Antiquities Act grants only creation power. This echoes the D.C. district court's 2021 decision, which was vacated on standing grounds before reaching the merits. The question could reach the Supreme Court.

Administration wins; shrink stands

Possible Resolves by Dec 1, 2028

Discussed by: Interior Department officials and Utah's Republican congressional delegation

Courts defer to the executive branch's interpretation of the Antiquities Act, ruling presidents may modify monument boundaries. This follows historical practice — presidents have adjusted monuments before — and would let the July shrink stand, allowing the mining claims to proceed.

Suits dismissed on standing; question left open

Unlikely Resolves by Jan 15, 2028

Discussed by: Attorneys who note the prior 2017 challenge was dismissed on standing grounds

Courts find the plaintiffs lack standing to challenge the shrink, as the D.C. Circuit did in the prior round, so the merits never get decided. The reduced boundaries would stand by default, but without setting a binding precedent on presidential power.

Congress settles the monument boundaries

Unlikely Resolves by End of 2028

Discussed by: Observers of the 1950 Grand Teton settlement, when Congress ended a monument fight with legislation

Congress passes a law codifying the monuments' boundaries, removing the decision from the executive branch. This would end the litigation but is a heavy lift given partisan divides over public land policy.

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

1943–1950

Grand Teton settlement (1950)

President Franklin Roosevelt enlarged Grand Teton National Park by proclamation in 1943, provoking lawsuits from Wyoming officials. Congress resolved the fight in 1950 with legislation codifying the park's boundaries.

Then

The statute ended the litigation and set a compromise boundary.

Now

It became the model for resolving monument fights through Congress rather than the courts.

Why this matters now

Shows the alternative path — legislative settlement — that could end the current dispute without a Supreme Court ruling.

September 1996

Grand Staircase-Escalante designation (1996)

President Clinton created the 1.7-million-acre monument in southern Utah, halting a proposed coal mine on the Kaiparowits Plateau. Local officials and industry fought the designation for years.

Then

The coal mine was abandoned; the monument became a tourism draw.

Now

It established the modern pattern: presidents use the Antiquities Act to lock up lands against resource extraction, and opponents challenge the scope of that power.

Why this matters now

The 2026 fight reopens the same conflict — protected red-rock lands versus energy development — with the same law at its center.

December 2017 – June 2023

Bears Ears legal challenge (2017–2023)

After Trump's first shrink, tribes and environmental groups sued. In 2021, a federal judge ruled the shrink exceeded presidential authority. The D.C. Circuit reversed on standing grounds, and the Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal. The legality of monument reduction was never decided.

Then

The shrink was reversed when Biden restored the monuments in October 2021, mooting the core dispute.

Now

The merits question — whether presidents can shrink monuments — remains open, which is why the 2026 suits revive the same argument.

Why this matters now

The new lawsuits are an attempt to get a court to finally rule on the question that escaped review last time.