In Defense of Kimberly Yee’s Stance on Land and Sovereignty

At NASP, we strongly support Arizona Treasurer Kimberly Yee’s actions against the Biden Administration’s designation of the Grand Canyon National Monument. The creation of this monument, while on the surface, a victory for environmental radicalism, raises profound concerns about land management, culture epistemology, tribal and state sovereignty, Indian self-determination, and economic sustainability that we cannot overlook.

Kimberly Yee’s lawsuit, challenging the federal government’s “unlawful land grab” under the Antiquities Act, is not merely a legal battle – but a fight for responsible ownership, economic freedom, and respect for the lands that have sustained our communities for generations. The designation of over 900,000 acres as federal land disguised as a national monument, isolating tens of thousands of acres of state trust lands, and removing the ability for tribal economic interests or areas for housing – directly undermines the ability to manage its resources and support its primary beneficiaries: the children and future leaders educated in our K-12 schools.

Though dressed up as protecting sacred lands and preserving natural beauty, the federal government’s action fails to account for the nuanced balance required to respect both the environment and the economic needs of the local communities. The lands in question – We also question the designation of the area activists are calling sacred. We have never heard elders speak of this area as sacred – are valuable, offering the potential for resource development to support education, infrastructure, and public services – to tribal and non-tribal residents. 

Furthermore, the unilateral nature of this designation, bypassing extensive local consultation and consensus-building, echoes historical patterns of disregard for the autonomy and voices of Native American communities – who have for years asked for land for development, housing, and other agricultural and business-building needs. NASP believes in the importance of honoring and protecting our ancestral lands. However, such protection must be balanced with the need for Indian self-determination and the sovereign right to manage our resources.

Kimberly Yee’s stand is a courageous affirmation of these principles. By challenging the federal overreach, she is advocating for our interests – shut out by well-funded outside activists – and a vision of real ownership that is balanced and respectful of tribal sovereignty and state authority. Her actions remind us of authentic, collaborative approaches that respect the land and the people who depend on it.

In this critical moment, Kimberly Yee’s lawsuit represents more than a legal challenge; it is a call to reexamine how we, as a nation, approach land management and respect for state and tribal sovereignty. It urges us to seek solutions that ensure that our communities have real options when we push back on federal ‘land grab’ mandates.

The Native Americans for Sovereignty and Preservation applaud Kimberly Yee’s efforts.