Lexplug logoLexplug

Kleppe v. New Mexico

Supreme Court of United States
426 U.S. 529 (1976)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

The Property Clause of the U.S. Constitution grants Congress complete power to make all needful rules and regulations respecting federal property, which includes the authority to regulate and protect wildlife on public lands. Federal legislation enacted pursuant to this power preempts any conflicting state laws under the Supremacy Clause.


Facts:

  • In 1971, Congress enacted the Wild Free-roaming Horses and Burros Act to protect these animals on public lands.
  • The New Mexico Livestock Board, asserting its authority under the state's Estray Law, terminated a cooperative agreement it had with federal secretaries for managing these animals.
  • In February 1974, a rancher, Kelley Stephenson, complained to the New Mexico Livestock Board that unbranded burros on federal land, where he had a grazing permit, were interfering with his cattle.
  • The federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) informed Stephenson that it would not remove the burros.
  • Acting under state law, the New Mexico Livestock Board entered federal public lands, rounded up 19 unbranded burros that were protected under the federal Act, and removed them.
  • The Board subsequently sold the burros at a public auction, consistent with its usual practice under state law.
  • The BLM asserted its jurisdiction under the federal Act and demanded that the Board recover the animals and return them to the public lands.

Procedural Posture:

  • The State of New Mexico, its Livestock Board, and other parties sued the Secretary of the Interior in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico.
  • The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment that the Wild Free-roaming Horses and Burros Act was unconstitutional and an injunction to prevent its enforcement.
  • A three-judge District Court was convened and, after a hearing, held the Act unconstitutional for exceeding Congress's power under the Property Clause.
  • The District Court permanently enjoined the Secretary of the Interior from enforcing the Act's provisions.
  • The Secretary of the Interior, as the appellant, appealed the District Court's decision directly to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the Wild Free-roaming Horses and Burros Act, which protects unbranded and unclaimed horses and burros on federal public lands, exceed Congress's authority under the Property Clause of the Constitution?


Opinions:

Majority - Justice Marshall

No. The Wild Free-roaming Horses and Burros Act is a constitutional exercise of congressional power under the Property Clause. The Property Clause grants Congress not only the power to act as a proprietor to protect public lands from direct harm, but also the broader power of a legislature to make all 'needful Rules and Regulations' respecting that property. This 'complete power' over public lands necessarily includes the authority to regulate and protect the wildlife living there. The Court rejected New Mexico's argument that this power was limited to protecting the land from damage, stating that the power entrusted to Congress is 'without limitations.' Therefore, when Congress acts pursuant to the Property Clause, that federal legislation overrides any conflicting state laws, such as New Mexico's Estray Law, by operation of the Supremacy Clause.



Analysis:

This case significantly broadened the understanding of Congress's power under the Property Clause, affirming it is not limited to the narrow rights of an ordinary landowner. The Court established that Congress possesses a plenary, legislative-style authority over public lands, enabling it to enact comprehensive environmental and wildlife protection laws. This decision solidifies federal supremacy in managing resources on federal lands, effectively preempting state laws that conflict with federal objectives. The ruling provides the constitutional foundation for a wide range of federal land management and conservation statutes that might otherwise be challenged as infringing on traditional state police powers over wildlife.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Kleppe v. New Mexico (1976) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Kleppe v. New Mexico