by Anna Von Reitz
The Ninth Circuit Court (15-10-117) just ordered the Federales to prove federal subject matter jurisdiction --- not just assume subject matter jurisdiction-- over property "owned" by the federal government.
Federal ownership of land may be (and usually is) merely proprietary--- meaning that the Federales are acting as property managers--- a role that does not create any exclusive use by the federal government and does not create federal subject matter jurisdiction.
This Ninth Circuit case cited above is not directly tied to the Bundy Cases, but addresses the issue of federal subject matter jurisdiction merely presumed to exist on the basis of federal property ownership.
In truth and in fact claims of Federal subject matter jurisdiction require: (1) a Federal use of the land (that is, a use related to the duties directly delegated to the federal government); (2) specific action by the State ceding jurisdiction. Neither one of these conditions were met with regard to the Oregon Wildlife Refuge.
The portions of the Wildlife Refuge including the buildings which the protestors occupied were purchased by the Federales from private land owners back in the 1930's --- under a Congressional Act that not only allowed, but which invited, adverse possession claims such as the protestors brought forward and which additionally ordered the "liquidation" of such properties back to state or private ownership.