Violation
Oak Flat (Chi'chil Bildagoteel): 2014 land exchange, Apache Stronghold litigation and the March 2026 transfer
Not yet reviewed by this nation. What follows comes from public records and research. It does not speak for the nation.
A 2014 law authorized a land exchange, and Oak Flat passed to Resolution Copper in March 2026 despite Apache opposition.
- Treaty
- Treaty of Santa Fe (1852) invoked by Apache Stronghold; Public Land Order 1229 (1955)
- Nations
- San Carlos Apache, Tonto Apache and other Western Apache communities; Apache Stronghold (nonprofit)
- When
- 2014-2026
- Land affected
- Sacred and recreational lands; ceremonial access.
- Acreage
- 2,422 acres (Tonto National Forest)
What happened
This is a context entry, not an adjudicated treaty violation. The 1852 Treaty with the Apache, signed at Santa Fe, promised "perpetual peace and amity" between the Apache and the United States. In Article 9 the United States agreed to "designate, settle, and adjust their territorial boundaries." Apache Stronghold argued in court that the mine would violate the religious freedom of Apache people who consider Oak Flat an important religious site.
In 2014 Sen. John McCain added a provision to a defense bill that let the federal government swap 2,422 acres of the Tonto National Forest to Resolution Copper. KJZZ reports that the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from Apache Stronghold, a nonprofit group that tried to block the transfer. Eos adds that Apache Stronghold had argued the mine would violate the First Amendment rights of Indigenous people who consider Oak Flat a religious site. KJZZ says Oak Flat is a site the San Carlos Apache Tribe considers sacred, and that a federal appeals court denied tribes' and activists' request for an injunction three days before the transfer.
On March 16, 2026, KJZZ reported that more than 2,400 acres had been transferred to Resolution Copper. The Sierra Club and other opponents say the legal fight is not over. Because litigation is ongoing and a later development could change this picture, readers should check current news.
Good to know. No court has accepted a treaty claim over Oak Flat, and the legal fight is still developing.
Summarized with AI assistance from 3 sources and checked against their words; not yet reviewed by historians or by the nations. Report an error
What the sources say, and how this was checked
Supported by the sources below; some details rest on one source.
designate, settle, and adjust their territorial boundaries
Treaty with the Apache, 1852 (OSU Tribal Treaties Database)swap 2,422 acres of the Tonto National Forest
Ownership of Oak Flat transferred to Resolution Copper (KJZZ)violate the First Amendment rights of Indigenous community members
Supreme Court rejects tribal appeal (Eos)
Research notes. No source read confirms that Oak Flat lies within land the 1852 treaty addressed, and no court has accepted a treaty claim; Article 9 only promises that boundaries would be set. KJZZ was published March 16, 2026 and does not give the transfer date itself; it says the transfer came three days after an appeals-court denial. The 1955 Eisenhower order, the $150 billion value and crater-depth figures are from KJZZ or omitted. Oak Flat is sacred to Apache people; the entry does not describe it further. Developing story.
Who is doing the work
This history belongs to living nations. Start with them:
- Apache Tribe of Oklahoma
- Fort Sill Apache Tribe
- Jicarilla Apache Nation, New Mexico
- Lipan Apache Tribe of Texas
- Mescalero Apache Tribe
- Tonto Apache Tribe of Arizona
- White Mountain Apache Tribe of the Fort Apache Reservation, Arizona
- Yavapai-Apache Nation of the Camp Verde Indian Reservation, Arizona
Land return and Native-led work nearby
- Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition Nation government Tribal co-management and protection of Bears Ears National Monument Give on their site Website
- Colorado Plateau Foundation Native-led Grants to Native-led organizations protecting Colorado Plateau lands, waters and cultures Give on their site Website
- The Hopi Foundation Native-led Hopi community self-determination, capacity building, leadership programs and Hopi radio Give on their site Website
- Hopi Tutskwa Permaculture Institute Native-led Hopi land stewardship, food sovereignty and regional food hub Give on their site Website
Native legal and land defense, nationally
- Native American Rights Fund (NARF) Native-led Litigation and legal advocacy for tribal sovereignty, treaty rights, land and resources Give on their site Website
- NDN Collective (LANDBACK Campaign) Native-led LANDBACK campaign (launched 2020; Mount Rushmore closure and return of Black Hills public lands), Indigenous… Give on their site Website
- Indian Land Tenure Foundation (ILTF) Native-led Land recovery and control by tribes and individual Indian landowners Website
- Decolonizing Wealth Project (Indigenous Earth Fund; California Tribal Land Return) Native-led Reparative philanthropy Give on their site Website
Gifts go straight to each organization; this atlas takes nothing. Listing is not endorsement: how organizations are listed.
Connections
These links were matched automatically by name or date and have not yet been reviewed by a person.
Nations named 2
Taken to court in 1
Located in 1
Policy era 1
Concerns the instrument 1
Sources
The record’s fields
- What happened
- Oak Flat (Chi'chil Bildagoteel): 2014 land exchange, Apache Stronghold litigation and the March 2026 transfer -- A 2014 provision added to a defense bill (Sen. John McCain) authorized swapping 2,422 acres of the Tonto National Forest, including Oak Flat, to Resolution Copper. The land had been shielded from mining for nearly 60 years under a 1955 Eisenhower order. The U.S. Supreme Court rejected Apache Stronghold's appeal in May 2025; on Mar. 13, 2026 the Ninth Circuit denied an injunction; the Forest Service transferred Oak Flat to Resolution Copper on Mar. 16, 2026. Opponents continue to litigate; estimates cited are a copper deposit worth about $150 billion and a crater more than 1,000 feet deep. The 1852 treaty argument and religious-freedom claims are the Apache Stronghold legal theories; courts have not accepted them (treaty theory status).not yet checked against a source
- Legal aftermath
- Transferred; litigation continuing as of March 2026. Needs updating after Oct. 2026 (NARF index lists further 9th Circuit and Supreme Court filings in Sept. 2026, headlines only).
- Kind
- Violation
- Confidence
- Medium
- Nation review
- Not yet reviewed by this nation
- Notes
- Context record, not a treaty
- Some details not yet checked against a source