Summary
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the denial of preliminary injunctions challenging a federally mandated land exchange involving Oak Flat and the Resolution Copper mining project in Arizona. The court held that the plaintiffs’ claims were justiciable but that they had not shown a likelihood of success or serious questions on their appraisal, NEPA, consultation, religious-liberty, or related claims. The opinion was issued per curiam by a panel including Judges Rawlinson, Milan D. Smith, Jr., and Bress, with a partial dissent concerning appraisal issues noted as forthcoming.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the plaintiffs established Article III and prudential standing and challenged final agency action.
- Whether the Forest Service's appraisals complied with the Land Exchange Act and applicable appraisal standards, including treatment of minerals subject to unpatented mining claims.
- Whether the Final Environmental Impact Statement likely violated NEPA by inadequately addressing water impacts, agency comments, mitigation, extra-record evidence, alternative mining techniques, or statutory page limits.
- Whether the Government complied with consultation obligations under the Land Exchange Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
- Whether the land exchange substantially burdened religious exercise under RFRA or violated the Free Exercise Clause.
- Whether the plaintiffs were entitled to preliminary injunctive relief or an injunction pending appeal.
Holdings
- The plaintiffs established standing for their claims, including AMRC's appraisal claim, and the revised FEIS constituted reviewable final agency action because its publication triggered the statutory 60-day conveyance period.
- AMRC was unlikely to succeed on its appraisal claims because the Forest Service properly valued the Mining Claim Zone as encumbered by Resolution Copper's existing unpatented mining claims and did not include the value of minerals that Resolution Copper already had the exclusive right to extract.
- The plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on their NEPA claims because the FEIS addressed the relevant environmental consequences and alternatives within the broad zone of reasonableness required by the deferential standard of review.
- The Tribe and Lopez Plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on their consultation claims because the Government's extensive consultation and written responses were not arbitrary or capricious, and the consultation statutes did not require a particular substantive outcome.
- The Lopez Plaintiffs' religious-liberty claims were foreclosed by the Ninth Circuit's en banc decision in Apache Stronghold because the land transfer did not coerce religious adherents, discriminate against them, penalize them, or deny them equal access to governmental benefits.
- The plaintiffs failed to establish a likelihood of success on the merits or serious questions going to the merits, so the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying preliminary injunctive relief.
Key quotations
“Because Plaintiffs’ claims are unlikely to succeed on the merits, we affirm the district court’s denial of Plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction against the land exchange.” (2)
“Apache Stronghold therefore bars the Lopez Plaintiffs’ identical claims here.” (35)
“Because Plaintiffs’ claims are unlikely to succeed on the merits, we AFFIRM the district court’s denial of Plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction against the land exchange and DENY AS MOOT their request for an injunction pending appeal, Dkt. 12.” (36)
Factual background
The Southeast Arizona Land Exchange and Conservation Act requires the Forest Service to transfer approximately 2,500 acres of Tonto National Forest land, including Oak Flat and a large copper deposit, to Resolution Copper Mining, LLC in exchange for more than 5,000 acres of federally acquired land of equal appraised value. The Forest Service issued a revised Final Environmental Impact Statement on June 20, 2025, and prepared separate appraisals for land subject to Resolution Copper's unpatented mining claims and land without those claims. The plaintiffs alleged deficiencies in the appraisals, environmental analysis, tribal and historic-preservation consultation, and federal protection of religious exercise.
Procedural history
After the Forest Service issued a revised Final Environmental Impact Statement in June 2025, the district court denied renewed preliminary-injunction motions filed by the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition and the Tribe. The district court also denied the Lopez Plaintiffs' preliminary-injunction motion after their case was transferred from the District of Columbia. The plaintiffs appealed and sought injunctions pending appeal; the Ninth Circuit consolidated the cases, affirmed the denials, denied the injunction-pending-appeal request as moot, and dissolved the administrative stay.