The "3 Cubic Foot" Regulation

In Thomas, et. al. v. Lujan, et. al., USDC C.A. 92-0357, Judge Richey ruled against the vigilers on two charges brought by Concepcion Picciotto, William Thomas and Ellen Thomas. First, they claimed that the Department of Interior had shown no factual basis in their "Administrative Record" to justify their final publication of a new regulation -- again written by DOI Assistant Solicitor Richard Robbins -- limiting "storage of property" to three cubic feet. The plaintiffs charged that the rule was irrational, arbitrary and capricious. Although the government answered that the rule would not "interfere with ... holding vigils", the vigilers claimed that in reality the rule would criminalize the mere "possession" of essential materials as "storage of property," and would make it impossible for a vigiler to both survive the elements and distribute literature.

Ironically, the final three cubic foot regulation was published on February 6, 1992, only a few days after George Bush had declared a moratorium on new federal regulations, during his annual State of the Union address.

The Department of Interior purported that their publication of the three cubic foot rule stemmed from (a) four written complaints in 1989 about the "visual blight" of "protesters,"

How The Regulations Affect You!