The long and bitter legal fight over Oak Flat, a stretch of land in Arizona revered by the San Carlos Apache Tribe and eyed by mining interests for its vast copper reserves, reached another critical juncture this week. On August 15, 2025, U.S. District Judge Dominic Lanza denied a request by the tribe, environmentalists, and other plaintiffs to halt the federal government's planned transfer of Oak Flat to Resolution Copper, a joint venture of mining giants Rio Tinto and BHP. The ruling, reported by ABC and confirmed by multiple wire services, immediately set off a scramble among conservation groups and tribal advocates, who filed an urgent appeal to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. With a federal deadline to finalize the land exchange looming just days away, the fate of Oak Flat now hangs in the balance.
For many, the story of Oak Flat is as much about history and culture as it is about economics and national security. The area, known to the Apache as Chi’chil Bildagoteel, is dotted with ancient oak groves and home to traditional plants considered essential to the tribe's religious practices. According to the San Carlos Apache Tribe and the advocacy group Apache Stronghold, losing Oak Flat would mean the permanent destruction of a place of worship that has been central to their identity for generations. The legal battle dates back years, but the roots of the dispute stretch even further—about two decades, in fact, to when legislation proposing the land exchange was first introduced in Congress.
The measure failed repeatedly until 2014, when it was quietly tucked into a must-pass national defense spending bill. That legislative maneuver, as reported by ABC, set the stage for the current showdown. The mining project, if it proceeds, promises to be massive in scale. Resolution Copper estimates that the mine would generate $1 billion annually for Arizona's economy and create thousands of jobs, a prospect that has won support in nearby Superior and other mining towns. The economic stakes are high, and so too are the promises of enhanced national security by tapping into domestic copper supplies—a metal critical for everything from electronics to renewable energy infrastructure.
Judge Lanza's ruling, delivered with a tone of gravity, acknowledged the “stark trade-offs” at the heart of the Oak Flat controversy. On the one hand, there are the economic and national security benefits touted by supporters of the mine. On the other, there are the “indescribable hardships” that would result from the permanent destruction of the Apaches' historical place of worship. Lanza wrote, “Here, Congress chose to pursue the land exchange despite the existence of many significant trade-offs and the president chose to ratify Congress’s choice by signing the law into effect. As a result, the Court must accept that this choice advances the public interest and operate from that premise.”
For the tribe and their allies, the legal setbacks have been dispiriting but not defeating. The plaintiffs—who also include environmental organizations—have fought in court for years to save Oak Flat. Their concerns go beyond the spiritual and cultural; they argue that the federal government has not done its due diligence in assessing the risks associated with the mine. Specifically, they claim that the required environmental review, released by the U.S. Forest Service earlier this summer, failed to consider the potential for a dam breach, pipeline failure, or whether there was an emergency plan for the tailings storage area. They insist that before any land exchange can happen, the government must prepare a comprehensive review that considers “every aspect of the planned mine and all related infrastructure.”
Another point of contention is the appraisal of the land itself. Plaintiffs have raised concerns that the valuation did not adequately account for the value of the copper deposits beneath one of the federal parcels slated for exchange. This, they argue, could shortchange the public and further tilt the scales in favor of corporate interests over those of the Apache and the broader community.
Despite the setbacks, the plaintiffs have not given up hope. Conservation groups appealing the decision acknowledged the tight timeline but vowed to continue the fight. The San Carlos Apache Tribe, Apache Stronghold, and their supporters have made it clear that, for them, this is about more than just a patch of land—it is about the survival of a culture and the right to practice their religion in the places their ancestors have for centuries.
The legal journey has already seen its share of twists and turns. Earlier this year, in May 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected an appeal by Apache Stronghold, letting lower court rulings stand. That decision was a blow, but it did not end the matter. With the latest ruling by Judge Lanza, the case now moves to the 9th Circuit, where the plaintiffs hope for a different outcome.
The stakes are not lost on local communities either. While mining towns like Superior see the project as a lifeline for jobs and economic growth, others worry about the environmental and cultural costs. The debate has exposed deep divisions, not just between the tribe and the mining company, but within Arizona itself. For some, the promise of economic revitalization is too good to pass up. For others, the loss of Oak Flat would be an irreparable wound that no amount of money or jobs could heal.
Resolution Copper, for its part, has emphasized its commitment to responsible development and community engagement. The company says it will work closely with local stakeholders to address concerns and minimize impacts. But for the Apache and their allies, assurances from the company are cold comfort in the face of what they see as an existential threat.
The broader context of the fight over Oak Flat is a familiar one in the American West, where the push and pull between resource extraction and the preservation of sacred lands has played out time and again. What sets Oak Flat apart, perhaps, is the sheer scale of the proposed mine and the depth of feeling on both sides. As the deadline for the land transfer approaches, all eyes are on the 9th Circuit and the federal government, waiting to see whether the transfer will proceed or if the courts will step in once more.
For now, Oak Flat remains in limbo, a symbol of the complex and often painful choices that come with balancing economic development, national security, environmental stewardship, and cultural survival. With passions running high and the clock ticking, the next chapter in this long-running saga is about to unfold.