Alaska v. United States — Scalia, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part

Summary

Justice Scalia concurred in part and dissented in part, disagreeing with the majority's conclusion that the United States expressly retained title to submerged lands within Glacier Bay National Monument upon Alaska's statehood. He argued the statutory text of the Alaska Statehood Act did not plainly reserve those lands to the federal government, and the Court's reliance on its prior Alaska precedent was misplaced. Scalia concluded that Alaska’s claim for title should not be defeated on summary judgment given the absence of a clear statutory reservation.