Apache Stronghold, Plaintiff, vs. United States of America, et al., Defendants
DISTRICT COURT ISSUES INJUNCTION PENDING APPEAL TO SUPREME COURT
Excellent news from the legal mazeway
The federal district court which earlier had denied a preliminary injunction has granted an injunction pending appeal.
Apache Stronghold is battling to protect Chi’chil Biłdagoteel [Oak Flat] ancestral lands from a massive copper mine proposed in a Congressional transfer of the land to Resolution Copper, a joint venture of two Australian-based mining companies, BHP and Rio Tinto.
Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal:
…requests that the Court lift the stay of this case to enter a narrow, temporary injunction prohibiting Federal Defendants from transferring Oak Flat to Defendant-Intervenor Resolution Copper during the pendency of Apache Stronghold’s Supreme Court appeal.
On May 7, 2025, the Court conducted a hearing on the Motion where it heard witness testimony and oral argument.
The Court ruled as follows:
There is no close question in this matter. It is abundantly clear that the balance of equities “tips sharply” in Plaintiff’s favor, and that even in the short term, they have established a likelihood of irreparable harm should the transfer proceed. Furthermore, they have presented serious questions on the merits that warrant the Supreme Court’s careful scrutiny, should it agree to grant cert.
It remains the case that preliminary injunctions are an extraordinary remedy, and in the case of injunctions pending appeal, they ought to be reserved for those cases presenting novel, difficult, and important legal questions that warrant further consideration before the status quo is disrupted. … If this is not such a case, then what is?
As a final matter, Plaintiff has requested that the injunction remain in effect for 21 days after denial of the petition for certiorari, or 21 days after the issuance of the Supreme Court’s judgment. However, they have provided no reason for further delay once the appeal is resolved.
Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Injunction Pending Appeal is granted as modified. Federal Defendants are enjoined from publishing the Final Environmental Impact Statement and conveying the Federal land described in section 3003 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2015…. This injunction shall remain in effect until the day after denial of the petition for certiorari in Apache Stronghold v. United States… (should the petition be denied), or the day after the issuance of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Apache Stronghold v. United States … (should the petition be granted).
Dated this 9th day of May, 2025.
The full Order is here and in an attached PDF for those who want to read a rare example of startlingly clear and cogent legalese.
Background and Commentary from Redthought.org Presentation: “Oak Flat - A Sharing of Truth” [12 minute Preview and Full 3 hour Presentation]
St. Patrick's Cathedral wouldn't be destroyed to build a McDonald's, therefore Oak Flat certainly deserves being protected with respect for the Original caregivers-and-receivers.
Peter, this case here in Aust yesterday appears somewhat similar to the Apache Stronghold situations. https://www.mua.org.au/news/first-nations-land-rights-extinguished-court-favour-multinational%E2%80%99s-right-mine-gas-unions-vow-0