Supreme Court Decision Allows Controversial Copper Mine to Proceed

Categories: Arizona Breaking NewsArizona State News

The sacred Oak Flat area facing threats from the Resolution Copper mining project, as advocates push for preservation.

News Summary

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear an appeal from the Apache Stronghold, allowing the Resolution Copper mining project in Arizona to advance. This decision enables a land swap that puts the sacred Oak Flat area at risk. While supporters cite job creation and economic benefits, environmental and cultural concerns continue to fuel opposition from Native American tribes and conservation groups. The ruling raises significant questions about the balance between economic development and the rights of indigenous communities.

Arizona – The U.S. Supreme Court has decided not to hear an appeal from Apache Stronghold, a Native American organization, which sought to prevent the Resolution Copper mining project from moving forward in Arizona. This decision allows the controversial project to proceed, which includes a significant land swap that places the sacred Oak Flat area at risk of mining operations.

The Supreme Court’s refusal to take up the case means that the transfer of federally owned land to Resolution Copper, which is jointly owned by mining companies Rio Tinto and BHP, can now occur. The project is anticipated to provide approximately 25% of the nation’s copper supply and is supported by its proponents for its potential to create jobs and generate revenue for the state. However, environmental and cultural concerns have led to considerable opposition.

Apache Stronghold argues that the destruction of Oak Flat violates the First Amendment’s protections for religious freedom, as established under the 1993 Religious Freedom Restoration Act. The site is crucial for the Apache community’s spiritual practices, with various ceremonies held there that mark significant life transitions. The 1852 treaty, which promised to protect these lands for the tribe, is also central to their claims against the land swap.

On May 9, 2024, a federal judge temporarily halted the land transfer pending the Supreme Court’s decision. However, with the ruling now in favor of allowing the transfer, the U.S. Forest Service is set to begin a new environmental review essential for the project’s advancement, according to the latest legal framework.

The justices who declined to hear the appeal included several conservative members, with Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas dissenting. They expressed concern over the decision not to consider the case, labeling it a “grave mistake” regarding the implications for the rights of Native American groups.

Resolution Copper’s mining plans have faced opposition not only from Apache Stronghold but also from the San Carlos Apache tribe and various environmental organizations. Their concerns center on the potential ecological damage that such large-scale mining could cause in the region.

Supporters, including local officials such as the mayor of Superior, Arizona, contend that the project will bring economic opportunities, job creation, and an influx of tax revenues, particularly during a time when the mining sector is expected to grow in importance for the nation’s economy.

The land swap, authorized by Congress in 2014 as part of a defense spending bill, allows private mining interests to exchange land they own for valuable federal land—an arrangement that has raised questions about the prioritization of economic development over religious and cultural rights.

This case illuminates the ongoing struggle between governmental authority, religious rights of Native American tribes, and the quest for economic development within the context of environmental stewardship. The implications of the Supreme Court’s inaction extend beyond this singular case, potentially affecting future legal precedents regarding tribal lands and rights.

As the Resolution Copper project moves forward, the Apache community and its supporters continue to advocate for the protection of Oak Flat, highlighting the ongoing need for a careful balance between economic interests and the preservation of sacred cultural sites.