Newsom rebukes Trump after DOJ says national monument status for California lands can be rescinded by the president.

DOJ Says Presidential Power Allows Reversal of Landmark Protections

California Governor Gavin Newsom has issued a sharp rebuke of President Donald Trump following a Justice Department memo that empowers the president to reverse national monument designations, including those established during the Biden administration. The decision has reignited tensions between federal and state leaders over the future of protected lands in California.

The controversy centers on two areas in California, the Chuckwalla and Sattitla Highlands National Monuments, both of which were designated as national monuments by former President Joe Biden. Trump’s administration is now considering abolishing these protections, a move Newsom described as “petty” and evidence of a broader “war on California.”

“This is just getting petty. Grow up,” Newsom said in response to reports that the Trump administration may abolish the Chuckwalla and Sattitla Highlands National Monuments. His office echoed the sentiment on social media, stating, “If it’s a day ending in Y, it’s another day of Trump’s war on California.”

The Justice Department’s opinion reversed a 1938 position held by former Attorney General Homer Cummings, which asserted that presidential proclamations to protect natural areas could not be undone by subsequent administrations. The new memo argues that the president’s power is inherently reversible and cited examples where similar actions were previously taken.

Debate Over Environmental and Economic Impact

The administration maintains that placing large swaths of land under federal protection restricts opportunities for future economic development. This view, strongly opposed by environmental advocates, has sparked renewed debate about the long-term management of federal lands and the role of the Antiquities Act of 1906.

According to the Justice Department, monument designations may be revoked if the areas are found to “never have been or no longer deserving of protection under the Antiquities Act.” This interpretation builds on recent legal commentary, including a statement from Chief Justice John Roberts, who has signaled openness to cases challenging the scope of the Antiquities Act, particularly regarding economic restrictions on federal lands and seabeds.

Governor Newsom has not limited his criticism to Trump alone. He publicly mocked a podcast appearance by Donald Trump Jr. and referenced the notion, raised in right-wing media, that he could be arrested for opposing federal immigration enforcement. Newsom quipped online, “Promo code ARREST for 15% off your Trump Phone.”

The governor also accused Trump of seeking to provoke violence in Democratic-led states as a pretext to “militarize our cities.” Additionally, Newsom criticized House Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, who urged him to focus on “lawlessness and crime” in California’s major cities. Newsom responded by highlighting statistics showing Missouri’s homicide rate as more than double that of California.

The White House, in turn, dismissed Newsom’s remarks and defended the effort to open federal lands for development as an energy policy that benefits the state. “Freeing up federal lands in an effort to secure American energy dominance is not petty,” said spokesman Harrison Fields. “We wouldn’t expect Gavin to understand adult decisions that help his state, considering his legacy of failure.”

As the legal and political battles continue, the fate of California’s newly protected lands—and the precedent for future administrations—remains uncertain. The dispute underscores the ongoing conflict between state and federal authority over environmental and land use policy in the United States.