Patagonia has joined a coalition of conservation and tribal organizations in filing a lawsuit against President Donald Trump’s administration, challenging the decision to significantly reduce the size of Bears Ears National Monument in southern Utah. The suit, filed Wednesday in a federal district court in Washington, seeks to overturn the 2017 presidential proclamation that cut over 1.2 million acres—approximately 91 percent—of the monument’s protected area.
The lawsuit contends that under the Antiquities Act of 1906, which grants presidents the authority to designate national monuments, the power to diminish or rescind such designations does not exist. Bears Ears, designated by President Barack Obama in 2016, encompasses a landscape notable for its archaeological significance and cultural heritage, serving as ancestral land for five Native American tribes, including the Ute Mountain Ute.
Patagonia’s chief executive, Ryan Gellert, expressed concern about governmental actions he described as an attack on nature. “Pushback is more needed now than ever,” Gellert said, highlighting the administration’s broader rollback of environmental protections and perceived retaliations against institutions critical of its policies.
The Bears Ears reduction freed millions of acres for potential commercial development, including oil drilling and uranium mining. Records indicate that following the reduction, at least nine mining claims were registered within areas removed from the monument’s protection. Tribal leaders such as Deena Ute, executive director of the nonprofit A’Nuche, whose members include Ute Mountain Ute descendants, warned about the risk of irreparable harm to sacred sites, burial grounds, and rock art, emphasizing the cultural and historical loss involved.
Alongside Patagonia and A’Nuche, environmental groups such as the Conservation Lands Foundation are involved in the legal challenge. A separate suit seeks to restore protections to another Utah monument, Grand Staircase-Escalante, which was also dramatically reduced by Trump’s order in 2017. That monument, originally protected under President Bill Clinton in 1996, spans geologically distinct areas rich in fossils and sensitive ecosystems.
Patagonia has been publicly outspoken against the reductions since Trump’s first term, positioning itself as an advocate for public lands. The company previously protested the monument shutdowns with a stark message on its website, and ahead of the 2020 election, it embedded political messages encouraging voters to reject climate change denial.
Experts note the legal battle raises substantial questions about the limits of presidential authority under the Antiquities Act. Some environmental lawyers caution that if the dispute advances to the Supreme Court, the court’s conservative majority could issue a decision limiting presidential protections for monuments, potentially undermining millions of acres nationwide.
Rob Tadlock, Patagonia’s deputy general counsel, acknowledged the risks but said the firm believed the consequences of inaction were greater. The lawsuit builds on earlier efforts to contest the monument reductions, including challenges that led to President Joseph R. Biden Jr. restoring some protections before courts ruled on previous cases.
At the time of filing, neither the White House nor the Justice Department had responded to requests for comment on the new complaint. The controversy reflects an ongoing conflict between federal land management policies, commercial interests, environmental activists, and indigenous communities over the future of the West’s natural and cultural resources.