Cliven Bundy

Based on Wikipedia: Cliven Bundy

In April 2014, armed militia members took positions on highway overpasses in Nevada, aiming rifles at federal agents who were attempting to round up cattle. The cattle belonged to Cliven Bundy, a rancher who hadn't paid grazing fees in over two decades. The federal agents backed down and released the cattle. For a brief moment, Bundy became a conservative hero—a rancher standing up to government overreach. Then he opened his mouth about race, and the story took a very different turn.

The Man and His Philosophy

Cliven D. Bundy was born in Las Vegas on April 29, 1946. His father purchased a farm in Bunkerville, Nevada in 1949 and started grazing cattle on nearby federal land. This arrangement—ranchers paying fees to graze livestock on land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, or BLM—was standard practice across the American West.

But Bundy came to see things differently. He developed a worldview that blended several strains of anti-government ideology. He advocated for limited federal involvement in local affairs, particularly in ranching. He aligned himself with ideas from the sovereign citizen movement, whose adherents argue that the federal government is illegitimate and lacks jurisdiction over individuals. He believed that federal laws simply didn't apply to him.

Bundy claimed he didn't recognize federal police power over land that he insisted belonged to the "sovereign state of Nevada." Never mind that the Constitution's Property Clause explicitly grants Congress the power to make rules for federal territory. Bundy had his own interpretation.

He filed motions claiming federal courts had no jurisdiction because he was a "citizen of Nevada, not the territory of Nevada"—a distinction without legal meaning. During one interview, he cited Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution to assert the federal government could only own ten square miles of land. He appeared to have confused the clause that limits the District of Columbia to "ten Miles square" with a general restriction on federal land ownership. There is no such restriction.

J. J. MacNab, who writes about anti-government extremism for Forbes, described Bundy's views as inspired by the sovereign citizen movement. A key tenet of this ideology holds that the county sheriff is the most powerful law enforcement officer in the country, with authority superior to any federal agent or other elected official. The Federal Bureau of Investigation considers the sovereign citizen movement a major domestic terrorism threat.

Bundy is a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and has attributed the outcome of his standoff with federal agents to divine intervention. In May 2014, after his initial moment of fame, he changed his party affiliation from Republican to the Independent American Party.

Twenty Years of Unpaid Bills

The dispute that would make Bundy famous started quietly in 1993. That year, the BLM changed grazing rules to protect the desert tortoise habitat. In protest, Bundy declined to renew his permit for cattle grazing on federally administered lands near Bunkerville.

Then he kept grazing his cattle there anyway.

For years, the federal government pursued the matter through courts. In 1998, the United States District Court for the District of Nevada prohibited Bundy from grazing his cattle on an area later called the Bunkerville Allotment. He ignored the order. In July 2013, U.S. District Judge Lloyd D. George ordered Bundy to refrain from trespassing on federally administered land in the Gold Butte area of Clark County.

Bundy kept grazing his cattle there.

By this point, he owed over one million dollars in unpaid grazing fees and fines. The BLM decided to act.

The Standoff

On March 27, 2014, the BLM temporarily closed 145,604 acres of federal land in Clark County for the "capture, impound, and removal of trespass cattle." Law enforcement rangers began rounding up Bundy's livestock on April 5. The next day, they made an arrest.

Bundy called for support. Militia members responded—members of the Oath Keepers, the White Mountain Militia, and the Praetorian Guard. These weren't casual supporters. They were armed.

On April 12, 2014, Bundy issued an ultimatum to Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie: confront the federal agents, disarm them, and deliver their weapons to Bundy within one hour. Gillespie didn't comply. Instead, he negotiated between Bundy and newly confirmed BLM director Neil Kornze.

That same day, a group of protesters—some armed—advanced on the "cattle gather." Militia members took tactical positions on highway overpasses, aiming rifles down at federal agents below. Faced with the prospect of a bloodbath, Kornze made a decision: release the cattle and de-escalate.

The federal agents withdrew. Bundy had won.

Conservative media celebrated him as a patriot standing up to tyranny. Republican politicians praised him. Senator Dean Heller of Nevada described Bundy's armed defenders as "patriots." Fox News host Sean Hannity interviewed him multiple times and called him "a friend and frequent guest of the show."

As of the end of 2015, Bundy continued to graze his cattle on federal land. He still hadn't paid the fees.

The Remarks That Changed Everything

About a week after the climax of the standoff, on April 19, 2014, Bundy spoke with a journalist. He brought up witnessing the 1965 Watts riots. He shared his thoughts about African Americans and government assistance.

He recalled seeing a public housing project in North Las Vegas where older residents and children sat on porches with nothing to do. Then he said this:

I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro. When I go to Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, and I would see these little Government houses, and in front of that Government house the door was usually open, and the older people and the kids and there was always at least half a dozen people on the porch. They didn't have nothing to do, they didn't have nothing for the kids to do, they didn't have nothing for the young girls to do. They were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I've often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn't get no more freedom. They got less freedom.

The reaction was swift and devastating.

Harry Reid, then the Democratic Senate Minority Leader from Nevada, condemned Bundy's statement. He said Bundy had "revealed himself to be a hateful racist" and "a hypocrite" who "mooches off public land." Reid called on Republican leaders to "publicly condemn Bundy."

They did. Senator Dean Heller, who had called Bundy's supporters "patriots" just days earlier, said through a spokesperson that he "completely disagrees with Mr. Bundy's appalling and racist statements, and condemns them in the most strenuous way."

Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, who had previously supported Bundy, forcefully condemned the remarks.

Sean Hannity called Bundy's comments "beyond repugnant." Glenn Beck condemned them as "unhinged from reality" and urged supporters to "end your relationship" with him.

On April 23, 2014, Bundy defended his comments, saying "the statement was right."

A year later, he called the reaction a "misunderstanding." He said he wasn't racist and shouldn't have used the term "Negro." Then he proceeded to make similar statements, comparing "welfare and housing" to slavery. He expressed support for Black people who have "raised themselves up to a point where they are equal with the rest of us." He touted private-sector work as an alternative to government programs. "We don't need leeches feeding off us and eating off of us," he said. "We need producers."

What the Controversy Revealed

Patt Morrison, writing for the Los Angeles Times, saw the incident as emblematic of how ordinary people get "turned into the poster boy or the poster girl of some political battle." She wrote, "It happens so often that Las Vegas may have a betting line, not on whether these folks will implode but when. The Cliven Bundys of American politics, bit players who are suddenly promoted to center stage, are never as good as their adherents want them to be. They are not empty vessels, but they are flawed ones."

Some defenders, including journalist Ben Swann, questioned whether Bundy's "inarticulate" comments received "truthful representation." The New York Times had published the most inflammatory excerpt. Joseph Curl, writing for The Washington Times, noted the Times had failed to print the entire transcript, though he described Bundy's views as incorrect regardless.

Geoffrey Lawrence, deputy policy director at the Nevada Policy Research Institute, argued that while Bundy lost personal credibility with his racist remarks, the broader discussion about federal land use in the West shouldn't be abandoned. He called on Congress to address what he saw as "harsh and unfair federal misuse of state lands."

The Southern Poverty Law Center described Bundy's views as closely aligned with the Posse Comitatus organization, and asserted that such self-described "patriot" groups focused on secession, nullification, and Tenther movement principles—the idea that the Tenth Amendment reserves most governmental powers to states.

Arrest and Federal Charges

On February 10, 2016, Cliven Bundy was arrested by the FBI at Portland International Airport while attempting to travel to Burns, Oregon. He was heading there to support militants—including his son Ammon—who were occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge. Bundy was booked into the downtown Multnomah County jail.

Federal prosecutors filed a 32-page criminal complaint charging him with conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States, assault on a federal officer by use of a deadly weapon, two counts of use and carrying of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, interfering with commerce by extortion, and obstruction of justice. All counts included aiding and abetting charges.

Bundy made his first court appearance on February 11 before U.S. Magistrate Judge Janice M. Stewart in Portland. He requested court-appointed counsel. At a detention hearing on February 16, Stewart ordered Bundy held without bail, citing the serious nature of the charges and flight risk.

On March 10, 2016, Bundy refused to enter a plea and refused to recognize federal authority in the courtroom. U.S. Magistrate Judge Carl Hoffman entered a not guilty plea on his behalf and scheduled a detention hearing for March 17. His trial was initially set for May 2 but was postponed to February 6, 2017.

Two more of his sons—Melvin and David—were arrested on charges related to the standoff, along with twelve other men.

The Lawsuit and Legal Maneuvering

Also on March 10, 2016, Bundy filed a lawsuit against Judge Gloria Navarro, Senator Harry Reid, Reid's son Rory, and President Barack Obama. The lawsuit alleged various conspiracy theories and described Judge Navarro as a "Latino activist."

The next day, during a detention hearing, Bundy's lawyer attempted to serve the judge with the lawsuit, demanding she recuse herself because she was now involved in a legal conflict with Bundy. The motion was quickly denied, but the judge gave Bundy's lawyer until May 25 to argue whether her previous work as a prosecutor in Clark County merited recusal.

On May 25, Judge Navarro denied the recusal motion. She also ruled that Bundy would not be granted bail. Her reasoning included his history of ignoring federal laws and court orders, the number of supporters willing to act as armed bodyguards, the likelihood he would flee or fail to appear for court, and the potential for violence by his supporters.

Charlie Pierce, writing for Esquire, described Bundy's legal maneuvers as "a bubbling stew of pure crazy" that sounded "like it was dialed in from someone's car to the worst talk-radio show on Planet Stupid." Amanda Marcotte of Salon called it a "nuisance lawsuit" and an "incoherent scattershot."

On October 17, 2016, Bundy dismissed his lawsuit against Navarro, Obama, and the Reids.

Prosecutorial Misconduct and Mistrial

In a memo dated November 27, 2017, BLM lead investigator Larry Wooten made explosive allegations. He claimed he was removed from his role in the Bundy case for objecting to "a widespread pattern of bad judgment, lack of discipline, incredible bias, unprofessionalism and misconduct, as well as likely policy, ethical and legal violations among senior and supervisory BLM staff."

Wooten alleged that prosecutors had withheld potentially exculpatory evidence from the defense. However, a prior internal investigation by BLM special agent Kent Kleman had contradicted Wooten's specific allegations.

On January 8, 2018, Judge Gloria Navarro declared a mistrial. She dismissed all charges against Cliven Bundy with prejudice—meaning they could not be refiled—because the federal government had withheld potentially exculpatory evidence from the defense.

After twenty years of refusing to pay grazing fees, orchestrating an armed standoff with federal agents, and facing serious federal criminal charges, Cliven Bundy walked free.

The Bundy Legacy

Cliven Bundy's story became a touchstone in debates about federal power, states' rights, and anti-government extremism. To some, he remained a hero who stood up to federal overreach. To others, he was a freeloader who grazed his cattle on public land for decades without paying, then mobilized armed militias when the government tried to enforce the law.

His son Ammon followed in his footsteps, leading the 2016 occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon—another armed standoff with the federal government over land use policies.

The question of what to do about vast tracts of federally owned land in western states remains contentious. Nevada is 85 percent federally owned. Some argue this land should be transferred to state control. Others point out that states lack the resources to manage these lands and that privatization would eliminate public access to hunting, fishing, and recreation.

But whatever the merits of that policy debate, Cliven Bundy's approach—simply refusing to pay fees, defying court orders for two decades, and meeting federal agents with armed militia members—represented something different. It wasn't civil disobedience. It was a rejection of the legal system itself, rooted in a belief that federal law doesn't apply to those who don't consent to it.

That philosophy, taken to its logical conclusion, doesn't lead to policy reform. It leads to the end of the rule of law.