An Oregon man faced jail time after he allegedly engaged in illegal fishing at Yellowstone National Park. In response, the man challenged the rules themselves, calling them "unconstitutional," according to Cowboy State Daily.
If successful, the man's argument could upend decades-old rule-making processes not only at the National Park Service but at federal agencies across the board.
Authorities issued three citations against the man, Tate Pulliam, accusing him of fishing on a river that was closed to fishing for the winter, fishing without the proper license, and improperly accessing a road.
The park superintendent established the rules that Pulliam stands accused of violating. Pulliam and his lawyers argued that the superintendent lacked the legal authority to create such rules, making them invalid.
"Tate went to Yellowstone to enjoy public land and left facing criminal charges," said Michael Poon, a lawyer for Pulliam, according to Cowboy State Daily. "But Congress never made his alleged actions illegal.
"Instead, a park superintendent invented the rules behind these charges, resulting in massive overcriminalization. That is not how lawmaking works under the Constitution."
Pulliam and his lawyers face an uphill battle. A 2004 decision by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals found that a national park could enforce rules, the outlet reported.
Additionally, Stephanie Hambrick, the administrative judge presiding over Pulliam's case, recently rejected a similar argument in a different matter.
In that case, a trail runner faced a citation for illegally accessing a trail in Grand Teton National Park.
Hambrick rejected the runner's argument that park officials lacked rulemaking authority. In doing so, she noted that courts have long recognized the NPS' ability to establish rules that are "necessary and proper to effect Congress's stated goal of preserving and managing national parks," as quoted by Cowboy State Daily.
TCD Picks » Quince Spotlight
💡These best-sellers from Quince deliver affordable, sustainable luxury for all
|
Which of these savings plans for rooftop solar panels would be most appealing for you?
Click your choice to see results and earn rewards to spend on home upgrades. |
Save $1,000 this year 💸 Pulliam and his lawyers appear to have the odds against them as it relates to convincing Hambrick of their argument. However, the fact that similar arguments continue to be made highlights the trend of challenging the federal government's authority.
Lawyers with the Pacific Legal Foundation represented both Pulliam and the runner, Michelino Sunseri. The next hearing in the former's case is scheduled for May 12.
Get TCD's free newsletters for easy tips, smart advice, and a chance to earn $5,000 toward home upgrades. To see more stories like this one, change your Google preferences here.
Cool Picks
