Introduction

In April 2014, near Bunkerville, Nevada, Cliven Bundy and hundreds of armed supporters faced off with federal law enforcement officers who were removing his trespassing cattle from federal lands. Bundy described himself as the victim of a rogue federal government that trampled the US Constitution and deprived him of basic rights, and he was ready to “take this country back by force.”...

Winning by Threat of Force

Cliven Bundy has grazed livestock on federal land through the last three sagebrush rebellions. The story of the Bundy family ranch, northeast of Las Vegas, Nevada, illustrates the frustrations that many ranchers had with evolving federal land management over the last fifty years, as they went from being the dominant users of federal rangeland to one of multiple, competing users. It also illustrates some of the dominant ideologies and arguments that drove the last three conservative rebellions against federal authority, particularly those rooted in American civil religion and popular constitutionalism. And it encapsulates the evolution of western rebellion, from a regional, political challenge to federal authority to one that drew armed support from across the national. Having faced down federal law enforcement with armed militias, the Bundy family continues to graze livestock on federal land without authorization.

Popular Constitutionalism Applied

The Patriot Rebellion that swept across the West, driven by a mature infrastructure of conservative interests, counties, states, and individuals challenged the federal government directly over access to federal lands and economic development. States, led by Utah, claimed the power of eminent domain over federal lands and demanded that the federal government relinquished most of its land to them. Counties once again demanded control over federal land use planning, this time by arguing that the federal government needed to coordinate with county officials to ensure that federal land use plans met county needs.

Glenn Beck’s Common Sense

The Patriot Rebellion during the Obama administration demonstrated just how well conservative western frustrations with federal land management were woven into a national conservative challenge to federal authority, and it illustrated how well-integrated the militias were in conservative politics. Indeed, the line between mainstream and extreme political protest were blurred considerably compared to the Sagebrush Rebellion. The Patriot Rebellion was led by the largely Christian Tea Party movement, which used the language and symbols of the American Revolution to condemn the Obama administration and the federal government generally as unconstitutional tyrants. And it was carried further by the armed Patriot Movement, in which people claimed they were prepared to kill for the Constitution.

Conclusion

On January 20, 2017, Donald J. Trump took the oath of office as the forty-fifth president of the United States. Standing on the steps of the US Capitol, he painted a grim picture of the country: “Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities; rusted-out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation; an education system, flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of knowledge; and the crime and gangs and drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential.” He went on to detail each of these tragedies. But, he promised, the “American carnage stops right here and stops right now . . . America will start winning again, winning like never before. We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams.”...

“The Revolution was . . . Weird”

In the Bunkerville standoff, Cliven Bundy initially served as a symbol of a conservative American under attack by a runaway government. Two years later, Ammon Bundy and Ryan Bundy joined with a number of militia members in an offensive operation to take back federal land in Oregon, ostensibly for “we the people.” The Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Occupation showed how far the Patriot Movement would go in challenging federal authority, and it showed the insurrectionist tendency in the Patriot Movement’s civil religious constitutionalism. It also showed the limits of conservative support. In this case, the occupiers said that they went to the Malheur refuge to defend the people of Harney County, but most of them were from out of state, and they repeatedly ignored requests to leave from county officials. The occupation ended with one fatality and numerous arrests, but the federal government’s prosecution largely failed in court.

“This Precious Heritage of Desert”

The Sagebrush Rebellion erupted in 1979 out of anger over changing federal land law and management. In particular, many westerners were frustrated by expanding restrictions on grazing and road access, which threatened economic development. The Nevada State Legislature launched the rebellion when it passed legislation claiming ownership of all unreserved federal lands within its boundaries. Other western states followed Nevada. The Sagebrush Rebellion helped elected Ronald Reagan to the White House, and his first interior secretary, James Watt, gave considerably more control over federal land management to the states, thereby effectively ending the rebellion.

Losing in the Courts

The Hage family and the Dann sisters grazed livestock on federal lands in Nevada through the last three sagebrush rebellions. Their stories illustrate the frustrations that many ranchers had with evolving federal land law and management over the last fifty years, as they went from being the dominant users of federal rangeland to one of multiple, competing users. Unlike the Bundy family, the Hages and the Danns battled the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service largely in court, fighting to defend what they believed were either private property rights or Native American treaty rights. After four decades of political and legal conflict, neither family is able to graze livestock on federal lands. When militia force means victory and courts mean defeat, the federal land has become a dangerous place.

“Weirdness in the West”

Unlike the Sagebrush Rebellion, which remained largely regional, the War for the West enjoyed national support through a conservative infrastructure of media, think tanks, public interest law firms, foundations, advocacy organizations, and militias. Frustrations over federal land management were knit into a broader, civil religious story of the American paradise lost, in which the federal government was portrayed as a tyrant bent on trampling the US Constitution, particularly Bill of Rights. The War for the West was led by the mainstream Wise Use Movement, which linked property rights to gun rights and religious freedom, and by the more extreme militia movement, driven by dark conspiracy theories and a profound antagonism toward the federal government. In the Republican Revolution, led by Newt Gingrich, the Republican Party struggled to hold together these mainstream and extreme factions to gain and retain power. This further integrated conservative, Western anger with federal land management into national politics.

“Spitting Mad”

The War for the West started during the George H. W. Bush administration and exploded into a more narrowly partisan conflict when President Clinton took office. Tensions were driven by the rise of a new management paradigm, ecosystem management, which led to new emphases on riparian health in range management. They were also driven by ongoing disagreements over county road rights-of-way and economic development of federal resources. Skirmishes in the War for the West varied considerably. Individual ranchers battled the federal government to maintain their accustomed grazing practices; Catron County, New Mexico, launched the County Supremacy Movement by demanding that the federal government protect its established “customs and culture”; Nye County, Nevada, returned to battles from the Sagebrush Rebellion; and several counties in southeastern Utah reignited debates over their authority to manage ambiguous road claims in the wilderness. The net result was a rise in threats against federal employees during the 1990s.