Yount v. Salazar, 933 F. Supp. 2d 1215

Plaintiffs NMA/NEI and NWMA seek partial summary judgment challenging §204(c) FLPMA as unconstitutional.
Secretary Salazar withdrew over 1,000,000 acres in Northern Arizona from mining location/entry for up to 20 years under §204(a) with §204(c) veto to block withdrawals via concurrent resolution.
Congress did not veto the withdrawal within 90 days; withdrawal remains in effect.
BLM/Forest Service/DOI and Interveners the Trust cross-moved for summary judgment supporting the Secretary's authority.
Court held §204(c) veto unconstitutional but severable, so the withdrawal authority survives without the veto, and Plaintiffs’ motions are denied while Defendants’ cross-motions are granted.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether §204(c) legislative veto is unconstitutional.	Veto violates Chadha by bypassing constitutional procedures.	Veto is a valid check consistent with FLPMA's structure.	Veto unconstitutional.
Whether §204(c) is severable from the rest of §204(c).	Unconstitutional veto inseparably tied to large-tract withdrawal authority.	Severable; remainder remains operative under severability clause.	Veto severable; large-tract withdrawal authority remains.
Whether severing the veto defeats Congress’s intent and FLPMA’s structure.	Veto integral to FLPMA’s controls and repeal of implied authority.	Other controls (notice/reporting) suffice; structure supports severability.	Severance consistent with FLPMA’s structure.
Whether the FLPMA notice/reporting provisions retain value without a veto.	If veto is removed, notice/reporting have little effect.	Reporting requirements have meaningful oversight even without veto.	Reporting requirements remain meaningful and operative.
Impact of legislative history on severability decision.	Legislative history shows intent to curb Executive withdrawals with veto.	History supports both oversight and delegated authority; not strong evidence against severability.	Legislative history does not compel inseverability.

INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) (unconstitutional legislative veto severable from agency action; need for valid separation of powers)
Alaska Airlines v. Brock, 480 U.S. 678 (1987) (reporting/wait provisions preserve congressional oversight when veto struck)
Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420 (1998) (concurrence discussed severability; specific language matters, not just severability clause)
City of New Haven v. United States, 809 F.2d 900 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (overriding legislative veto context; importance of legislative history)
Carter v. Carter Coal Co., 298 U.S. 238 (1936) (severability test: what was Congress’s intent if unconstitutional provision removed)
United States v. Midwest Oil Co., 236 U.S. 459 (1915) (Executive withdrawal authority historically recognized)