Article 3 Section 8 Clause 17 of the United States Constitution reads,

“The Congress should have the power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excesses shall be uniform throughout the United States… to Exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such districts (not exceeding 10 miles square) as may, by the cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings.”

There are three methods by which the United States obtains exclusive or concurrent jurisdiction over federal lands in a state:

(1) a state statute consenting to the purchase of land by the United States for the purposes enumerated in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 7, of the Constitution of the United States;

(2) a state cession statute; and

(3) a reservation of federal jurisdiction upon the admission of a state into the Union.

See Collins v. Yosemite Park Co., 304 U.S. 518 (1938).

Title 37 Chapter 2 Article 17 of the Arizona Revised Statute lists cession statutes of the state of Arizona where concurrent legislative jurisdiction is ceded to the United States. These statutes determine where the federal government may exercise Executive and Judicial powers in the State of Arizona. State law gives concurrent jurisdiction to the federal government over post offices, military lands, Bureau of Reclamation lands, some National Parks, and federal prisons.

Since February 1, 1940, the United States acquires no jurisdiction over federal lands in a state until the head or other authorized officer of the department or agency which has custody of the lands formally accepts the jurisdiction offered by state law. See 40 U.S.C. § 255; Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 (1943). Prior to February 1, 1940, acceptance of jurisdiction had been presumed in the absence of evidence of a contrary intent on the part of the acquiring agency or Congress. See Silas Mason Co., Inc. v. Tax Commission, 302 U.S. 186 (1937).

Federal custody and control over this property bring with it a host of responsibilities, including in some cases federal criminal jurisdiction. Yet it is clear that federal criminal jurisdiction does not exist over real property simply because the United States owns it. See Adams v. United States, 319 U.S. 312 (1943).

Therefore, federal land managers have no authority to exercise executive or judicial powers on public lands in Arizona. An attempt to do so transpires into serious violation of the US Constitution. In essence, if the federal government ignores this constitutional limitation, they are engaging in a de facto dictatorship by exercising the power of all three branches of government.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13