The Catholic bishops are backing a suit by Apache Stronghold, a coalition of Native Americans and their supporters, in its lawsuit against the federal government. The lawsuit argues that the coalition’s freedom of religion was violated when the federal government announced its intention to sell formerly protected land in Arizona to a mining company. / Credit: Photo courtesy of Becket

CNA Staff, Oct 17, 2024 / 15:30 pm (CNA).

The U.S. bishops, the Knights of Columbus, and Catholic scholars are among the numerous advocates backing a Native American bid to save a centuries-old sacred site from commercial development. 

The federal government has for decades protected the site of Oak Flat in Arizona’s Tonto National Forest. The nearly seven-square-mile parcel has been viewed as a sacred site by Apaches and other Native American groups for hundreds of years and has been used extensively for religious rituals. 

Despite having protected the land from development for years, the federal government several years ago moved to transfer Oak Flat to the mining company Resolution Copper. The group’s proposed mining operations would largely obliterate the site. 

A coalition of Native American groups known as Apache Stronghold has filed a challenge to the decision, arguing that it violates both the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) and an 1852 treaty protecting Apache territory. The religious liberty law group Becket is representing the group in the case.

Two lower courts have opted to allow the transfer to continue. This week the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) joined an amicus brief with the Christian Legal Society and the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of the United States of America, arguing that those decisions stem from “a grave misunderstanding of RFRA that fails to apply its protections in evaluating that destruction.”

The transfer of the land “jeopardizes Native American religious practice and religious liberty more broadly,” the groups argue.

RFRA states that the government “shall not substantially burden” an individual’s religion, a standard the amici said “should include government action that considerably hinders, oppresses, or prevents religious exercise — including with respect to an individual’s adherence to his religious belief.”

The lower court interpretations “made [RFRA] a dead letter when applied to obliteration of an Indigenous sacred site on federal land,” the filing says.

“Beyond that catastrophic harm, this approach defies the statutory text, misreads precedent, and would produce other unjust results,” it says.

The Knights of Columbus similarly filed a brief in support of the Apaches, arguing that the decision to allow the property to be mined “reads into RFRA an atextual constraint with no grounding in the statute itself.”

The decision is devastating not just to the Apaches but to “the myriad religious adherents of all faiths and backgrounds who use federal lands every day for their religious exercise,” they said. 

Religious believers would be “subject to arbitrary government interference if RFRA’s long-standing protections are suddenly declared to be inapplicable,” the Knights said.

Another amicus brief in support of the Apache tribes was backed by the University of Notre Dame’s Lindsay and Matt Moroun Religious Liberty Clinic.

Religious liberty scholars from the Notre Dame Law School, Seton Hall University, and the University of St. Thomas School of Law also filed a brief backing the Native Americans. Numerous other religious groups also filed amicus briefs.

Apache Stronghold founder Wendsler Nosie said the “strong showing of support from a diversity of faiths — Catholics, Protestants, Muslims, Jews, Sikhs, and more — demonstrates that the threat to religious freedom at Oak Flat is a threat to religious freedom everywhere.”

“We pray that the justices take our case and ensure that our religious practices receive the same respect that all other faith traditions enjoy,” he said. 

Luke Goodrich, vice president and senior counsel at Becket, meanwhile, said the Supreme Court “should uphold its strong record of defending religious freedom by ensuring that the Apaches can continue worshipping at Oak Flat as they have for centuries.”