They shouldn’t. But they do because of bipartisan presidential abuse of the powers delegated to the president in the Antiquities Act.

Enacted in 1906, the Antiquities Act was designed to protect archaeological and historic sites from looting and destruction. It gave presidents the authority to proclaim as national monuments “historic landmarks,” “historic and prehistoric structures,” and other objects of historic or scientific interest on federal lands. It also required that the land reserved be limited to the “smallest area compatible” with protecting those objects.

Over time, however, presidents have used that authority to designate increasingly large areas of federal land. Despite being more than a century old, roughly 90% of all acreage ever designated under the Antiquities Act was designated in just the past 20 years. What began primarily as a tool for protecting archaeological and historic sites has evolved into a mechanism for presidents to impose broad restrictions across enormous areas of federal land.

One striking example came in 2016, when former President Barack Obama established the Northeast Canyons and Seamounts Marine National Monument off the New England coast. The monument covers roughly 4,900 square miles, roughly the size of Connecticut, and encompasses three underwater canyons and four seamounts.

Although the Antiquities Act empowers the president to designate “parcels of land,” it has been used to establish a sweeping management regime across thousands of square miles of ocean.

The implications for fishermen who make their livelihoods in those waters are enormous. The designation prohibited commercial fishing throughout the monument. Fishermen who violated the restrictions faced severe consequences, including civil penalties and sanctions affecting their fishing licenses. Those civil penalties could reach $100,000 per violation per day.

Impacted fishermen challenged the designation in court, arguing that the Antiquities Act’s reference to federal “lands” did not authorize the president to designate the seabed beneath the Atlantic Ocean.

The Supreme Court ultimately declined to hear the case, but Chief Justice John Roberts issued a statement accompanying the court’s denial of review. He warned that the Antiquities Act had become a presidential power “without any discernible limit” to set aside vast areas of land and sea. Roberts said the questions raised by the case could warrant Supreme Court consideration in the future.

But Congress does not have to wait for the courts to rein in Antiquities Act abuse.

This month, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) introduced the Legislative Approval for National Designations Act, or LANDs Act, to reform the Antiquities Act and place limits on presidential authority over federal lands.

Among other provisions, the bill would make three key reforms:

First, it would require congressional authorization for national monument designations larger than 640 acres. That would give Congress a direct voice in major decisions affecting federal lands and make policy more durable between administrations.

Second, the legislation would clarify that “lands” means land, foreclosing the ability for presidents to create so-called “marine” national monuments as Obama did in 2016.

Third, the legislation would establish clearer limits on what qualifies as an “object of antiquity.” Relics, artifacts, and fossils would fall within the traditional understanding of what the law was designed to protect, while broad and amorphous categories such as entire landscapes and ecosystems would not.

Taken together, these reforms would restore a greater role for Congress in decisions involving large areas of federal land and provide clearer limits on presidential authority under the Antiquities Act.

FOR DECADES, LABOR UNIONS HAD A FREE PASS TO SPEW RACIAL SLURS. IT JUST ENDED

The recent debate over Grand Staircase-Escalante demonstrates the consequences of leaving such sweeping authority in presidential hands. One president can lock up millions of acres, another can reduce those restrictions, and a third can restore them again. That cycle creates uncertainty for communities, landowners, conservationists, and others whose interests depend on federal land policy.

Congress should not wait for the courts to resolve the boundaries of executive authority. It should reclaim its constitutional role in making major decisions about federal lands. Passing the LANDs Act would be a significant step toward doing so.

Megan Jenkins is the strategic research director at Pacific Legal Foundation. John Nagle is a federal policy manager at PLF.