The Oregonian newspaper, among other Main Stream Media outlets, has referred to a Supreme Court ruling to justify the authority of the Federal Government to own the Malheur Wildlife Refuge. This case, KLEPPE v. NEW MEXICO, was about the authority of the US Government to manage wildlife on "public lands." The Court found that the Feds did indeed have that authority, based on Article IV, Section 3 of the Constitution, the "Property Clause." It is important to note that the Court did not question the right of the Federal Government to own lands within State contrary to Article I, Section 8, nor did it justify such ownership. It completely ignored that issue. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/426/529.html What is clear is that the case the MSM and the Environmentalists are using to justify Federal ownership of the Malheur Wildlife Refuge and the BLM land the Hammonds were convicted of damaging, does not address the question of whether the ownership is Constitutional, only that if it were "public land", the Feds would have authority over the wildlife on it. That issue may have been litigated in another case. I have no knowledge of such a case. I would expect the MSM to cite that case if it indeed existed, so such a case probably was never litigated. It appears that this is just another example of the Feds and Environmentalists using the "Big Lie" method of disinformation.