Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment v. Utah Department of Natural Resources: public-trust lawsuit over the Great Salt Lake
- Communities and civil society Plaintiffs (five groups): The state has a duty to maintain the lake at a level consistent with trust uses, including by reducing unsustainable upstream diversions. Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (plaintiffs' pleading)
- Government and regulators State defendants and intervenors: Argued the public trust does not protect the lake's waters; the court rejected the position on the lake's navigable waters. Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (copy hosted by Earthjustice)
- Courts Judge Laura S. Scott (27 March 2025): The public trust includes the lake's navigable waters and underlying lands; upstream diversions are not shown to remain subject to the public trust. Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (copy hosted by Earthjustice)
Five conservation and health groups sued three Utah agencies in September 2023, alleging the state failed to protect the Great Salt Lake under the public trust doctrine. On 27 March 2025 the Third District Court denied the motions to dismiss in substantial part, holding that the trust includes the lake's navigable waters; in February 2026 the state invoked a new law to move the case to a three-judge panel.
Relief sought in the complaint; the 27 March 2025 ruling did not set a lake level.
Status As of February 2026: motions to dismiss denied in substantial part on 27 March 2025; the state filed a notice for a three-judge panel on 22 February 2026 and the plaintiffs moved to block it; no ruling or trial date found.
- State defendants and intervenors — Their motions to dismiss were denied in substantial part, though the court granted dismissal of the claim over upstream diversions Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (copy hosted by Earthjustice)
- Great Salt Lake and the people who live near it — As alleged in the complaint: structural decline of the lake, loss of 73 percent of its water and 60 percent of its surface area by fall 2022, and dust containing arsenic, mercury, nickel and lead Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (plaintiffs' pleading)
What happened
In September 2023 Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, the American Bird Conservancy, the Center for Biological Diversity, the Sierra Club and the Utah Rivers Council, represented by Earthjustice, sued the Utah Department of Natural Resources, the Division of Water Rights and the Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands in the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County (Case No. 230906637). The complaint alleges that "Water diversions. have driven the Great Salt Lake into structural decline", that the lake had lost approximately 73 percent of its water and 60 percent of its surface area as of fall 2022 compared with a 1850-2016 baseline, and that exposed lakebed sediments contain arsenic, mercury, nickel, lead and other pollutants. It asks the court to declare that the state breached its trust duty, to direct the state to halt any further decline in the lake's average annual elevation within two years of the court's judgment and to restore a lake elevation of 4,198 feet within ten years. The Governor's Office declined to comment on the case in 2023; the Department of Natural Resources said "There has been unprecedented interest, investment and action to preserve and protect the Great Salt Lake in recent years."
On 27 March 2025 Judge Laura S. Scott ruled that "The motions to dismiss are denied in substantial part." She held that "Utah's public trust includes the navigable waters of the Great Salt Lake as well as the sovereign lands underlying those waters", that the state has "ongoing fiduciary duties to protect and preserve the waters of the Great Salt Lake from substantial impairment", and that the plaintiffs had stated a claim for breach, while writing "the court is not ruling that the State has, in fact, breached its duties as trustee". She dismissed the claim for an order directing the state to review and modify upstream diversions, writing that while it "may be true that upstream water diversions are 'by far the most significant cause' of the Great Salt Lake's 'precipitous decline,'" the court was not persuaded that those diversions "remain subject to the public trust" or that mandatory modification of perfected water rights was feasible under Utah's prior appropriation system. The movants included the state defendants, three water conservancy districts, water-user groups including PacifiCorp, four cities and state agencies. The Department of Natural Resources said, in a statement reported by Utah Public Radio, that the state remains unwavering in its commitment to maintaining the health of the Great Salt Lake and that it believes Utah's collaborative approach will prevail in court.
According to Earthjustice, H.B. 392, passed on 13 February 2026 and signed the same day, lets the state move any civil action to which a state entity is a party to a three-judge panel chosen at random, and S.J.R. 5 applies it to active cases; the state filed its notice to convene a panel in this case on 22 February 2026. The plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction on 24 February, arguing the application violates the Utah Constitution. The sources reviewed do not report a ruling on the motion, a panel assignment or a trial date.
- 2023September: complaint filed in Third District Court against DNR, the Division of Water Rights and FFSL
- 202417 September: hearing on motions to dismiss
- 202527 March: Judge Laura S. Scott denies the motions to dismiss in substantial part
- 202613 February: H.B. 392 passed; 22 February: state files notice for a three-judge panel; 24 February: plaintiffs move for a temporary restraining order and injunction
What was said
“The baby steps Utah has taken at the Great Salt Lake are woefully inadequate”
“The Great Salt Lake belongs to the people of Utah and the state has a legal obligation to protect this resource.”
“These new laws clearly violate Utah's constitution”
“Utah's only plan to save this precious aquatic ecosystem is to drown us in hype and marketing.”
Where accounts differ
Each party's account, side by side, with its source. The record does not settle these points; it shows them.
The state has a duty to maintain the lake at a level consistent with trust uses, including by reducing unsustainable upstream diversions.
Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (plaintiffs' pleading)Argued the public trust does not protect the lake's waters; the court rejected the position on the lake's navigable waters.
Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (copy hosted by Earthjustice)The public trust includes the lake's navigable waters and underlying lands; upstream diversions are not shown to remain subject to the public trust.
Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (copy hosted by Earthjustice)How it looked
Shown
- The state's approach described as collaborative and as one that will prevail in court (statement as reported by Utah Public Radio, March 2025).Utah Department of Natural Resources · Utah Public Radio
Recorded
- The court held that Utah's public trust includes the navigable waters of the Great Salt Lake and the lands beneath them, and that the state has ongoing fiduciary duties as trustee; it did not rule that the state had breached them.
- The court declined to order the state to review upstream diversions.
- The state filed a notice to convene a three-judge panel on 22 February 2026; no ruling on the plaintiffs' motion appears in the sources reviewed.
Who gained
Reached nature or the ground
Gained elsewhere
Responses on record
- utah-dnr (March 2025): Said, in a statement reported by Utah Public Radio, that the state remains unwavering in its commitment to maintaining the health of the Great Salt Lake and that it believes Utah's collaborative approach will prevail in court. · Utah Public Radio
- utah-governors-office (6 September 2023): Declined to comment on the case, saying the state does not comment on ongoing litigation. · KSL.com
- utah-dwr-water-rights: No statement of its own is recorded in the sources reviewed.
In court and with insurers
Lawsuits and rulings
- 2023-09–OngoingUtah Physicians for a Healthy Environment et al. v. Utah Department of Natural Resources et al. (Case No. 230906637)Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah · Civil · Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, American Bird Conservancy, Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club, Utah Rivers Council → Utah Department of Natural Resources, Utah Division of Water Rights, Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands (intervenors: three water conservancy districts, water-user groups, cities and state agencies)
Public-trust claim for declaratory and injunctive relief. Motions to dismiss denied in substantial part on 27 March 2025; the court did not rule that the state breached its duties and declined to order review of upstream diversions. The state sought a three-judge panel in February 2026. Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (copy hosted by Earthjustice)
Insurers
What nature saw
Nature's report opens this page. Below: further outcomes measured on the ground.
What we don't know
Nature
- Not measured Harm to nature: The record holds no measurement of harm to nature.
- Disputed Whether the public trust covers the lake's waters and upstream diversions
Record
- None on record None on record in the sources reviewed: a ruling on the plaintiffs' February 2026 motion for a temporary restraining order, whether the case moved to a three-judge panel, and any trial date.
- None on record None on record in the sources reviewed: a finding that the state breached its duties; the court said at the motion-to-dismiss stage that it was not so ruling.
- None on record None on record in the sources reviewed: the state's own response to the 2026 motion; Earthjustice's release carries no state quote.
- None on record None on record in the sources reviewed: a court-stamped filing date; the complaint copy read is signed "this 6th day of September, 2023" and KSL's article of 6 September 2023 says the suit was filed "Wednesday".
Did the harm stop?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Who paid?
Not stated in the sources reviewed.
Sources
Courts
- Complaint, Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment et al. v. Utah Department of Natural Resources et al., Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County (copy hosted by Earthjustice)Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (plaintiffs' pleading) · 2023-09
- Ruling and Order re: Motions to Dismiss, Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment et al. v. Utah Department of Natural Resources et al., Case No. 230906637, Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County (Judge Laura S. Scott)Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, Utah (copy hosted by Earthjustice) · 2025-03-27
Press and investigations
- Despite objections of Utah officials, a lawsuit over Great Salt Lake moves forwardUtah Public Radio · 2025-03-31
Communities and civil society
- Judge Rejects Effort by Utah Officials to Derail Great Salt Lake LawsuitEarthjustice (plaintiffs' counsel) · 2025-03-27
- Groups Seek to Halt Recently-Passed Utah Laws from Derailing Great Salt Lake LawsuitEarthjustice (plaintiffs' counsel) · 2026-02-25
Connected cases
- Dust and arsenic from the exposed Great Salt Lake lakebed: studies by USGS, the University of Utah and Utah State University United States · 2018–2026 Related matter
- Hawaii shallow-set longline swordfish fishery: loggerhead interaction limits, Ninth Circuit ruling and 2018 closure United States · 2004–2020
- Earthjustice (NGO) — here: Counsel for the plaintiffs; there: Named with the plaintiffs
- Center for Biological Diversity (NGO) — here: Plaintiff; there: Plaintiff
- Utah's spending in the Great Salt Lake's name since 2022: water trust, appropriations, leases and donated water rights United States · 2022–2026
- Utah Department of Natural Resources (Public authority) — here: Defendant; there: State department whose executive director commented on the state's investment in the lake
- Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands (Public authority) — here: Defendant (Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands); there: State division that oversees the trust and manages the lake's sovereign lands
- Bears Ears national monument shrinkage (USA) United States · 2016–2026
- Earthjustice (NGO) — here: Counsel for the plaintiffs; there: Reported the mining claims
- Bloomberg, Steyer and Bezos money shapes coal and nature campaigns United States · 2008–2026
- Sierra Club (NGO) — here: Plaintiff; there: Environmental group running the Beyond Coal campaign with Bloomberg funding
- CEC factual record on Mexico's enforcement for loggerheads in the Gulf of Ulloa (SEM-20-001, USMCA Chapter 24) Mexico · 2020–2024
- Center for Biological Diversity (NGO) — here: Plaintiff; there: Submitter (17 December 2020)
- Great Salt Lake, Utah: record-low level on 7 November 2022 and the attribution of the decline United States · 1847–2026
- Utah Department of Natural Resources (Public authority) — here: Defendant; there: State department that manages the lake's sovereign lands through its divisions
- Mineral extraction on the Great Salt Lake: royalties, severance tax, the 2024 audit and Compass Minerals' voluntary agreement United States · 1960–2026
- Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands (Public authority) — here: Defendant (Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands); there: Manages mineral leases and royalty agreements; counterparty to the voluntary agreements
- Sierra Club donations from Chesapeake Energy United States · 2007–2012
- Sierra Club (NGO) — here: Plaintiff; there: Recipient; environmental organisation
- Starbase launch site, Boca Chica, Texas: environmental review, penalties and Starship debris United States · 2022–2025
- Center for Biological Diversity (NGO) — here: Plaintiff; there: Lead plaintiff in the 2023 lawsuit
- US coal ash ponds, groundwater contamination and EPA delay United States · 2015–2026
- Earthjustice (NGO) — here: Counsel for the plaintiffs; there: Environmental law group
- US Congress lifts 2023 mining ban on Minnesota's Boundary Waters United States · 2023–2026
- Earthjustice (NGO) — here: Counsel for the plaintiffs; there: advocacy group reporting the removal
- US Endangered Species Act rollbacks 2025–2026 (God Squad Gulf exemption, critical habitat rules) United States · 2025–2026
- Earthjustice (NGO) — here: Counsel for the plaintiffs; there: NGO that stated an intention to sue
- US Magnesium: Utah's lease termination, the company's bankruptcy and the state's US$30 million purchase of the Great Salt Lake plant United States · 1961–2026
- Utah Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands (Public authority) — here: Defendant (Division of Forestry, Fire and State Lands); there: Lessor of the lake lands; sought lease termination; buyer of the assets
- US Southeast shrimp skimmer-trawl turtle excluder device rule (2019) and the Louisiana Shrimp Association litigation United States · 2019–2026
- Earthjustice (NGO) — here: Counsel for the plaintiffs; there: Published the release of 1 September 2026 on the Fifth Circuit ruling
- Utah transfers 22,311 acres at the Bear River Migratory Bird Refuge to the federal government for US$60 million United States · 2026
- Office of the Governor of Utah (Government) — here: Declined to comment on the case in 2023; there: Announced the settlement terms