Ammon Bundy, the leader of the militant group that took over an Oregon wildlife refuge earlier this year, plans to challenge in court the federal government’s authority over the land.

The challenge is part of Bundy’s defense against federal charges regarding the 41-day takeover, including conspiring to impede federal officers, possession of firearms or dangerous weapons in a federal facility and other charges.

{mosads}Bundy’s attorney, Lissa Casey, made the argument in a late Friday filing in which she said she plans to moved to dismiss the case because the federal court does not have jurisdiction in the matter.

“Defendant Ammon Bundy intends to provide evidence to the court to prove lack of jurisdiction over the refuge property due to issues with title which are in conflict with the United States Constitution. Given the complexities of the evidence involved, it is not a simple legal argument that can be briefed and expedited for the Court,” the attorney wrote.

She said the United States Constitution grants the federal government “very limited powers” to hold land within states itself, and that the vast majority of federally owned land is therefore unconstitutional.

Another defendant in the case over the occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge tried unsuccessfully to make a similar challenge, according to the Oregonian. It’s a common argument among people who want federal land given to states or individual owners.

Tags Ammon Bundy Oregon wildlife refuge occupation

The Hill has removed its comment section, as there are many other forums for readers to participate in the conversation. We invite you to join the discussion on Facebook and Twitter.

See all Hill.TV See all Video

Most Popular

Load more

Video

See all Video