A federal judge dismissed a lawsuit brought by agricultural workers at Point Reyes National Seashore who challenged a settlement agreement ending most cattle ranching at the Marin County site, but granted the plaintiffs an opportunity to revise their claims.
U.S. District Judge Maxine Chesney issued a bench ruling Friday granting motions to dismiss filed by both the federal government and environmental groups in the case. The Bill Clinton appointee gave the approximately 150 agricultural workers leave to amend their complaint after identifying weaknesses in their legal arguments.
"My ruling is to dismiss in each instance granted for the reasons I stated here on the record," Chesney said during the hearing. "I hope you accept that I gave this quite a bit of review and thought, and I am going to give the plaintiffs an opportunity to amend. They know where the weak points are in the complaint, flesh it out to get to first base."
The agricultural workers filed their lawsuit in February 2024, alleging the National Park Service conspired with environmental groups to unlawfully evict ranchers and workers from Point Reyes. Their legal challenge stems from a January 2025 settlement agreement between the government and environmental organizations that aims to end most cattle ranching operations at the national seashore by early 2026.
Unlike ranch owners who received compensation under the settlement, the agricultural workers were not included in the financial arrangements despite living and working on the property. The workers argue this disparity violates their constitutional rights and federal housing protections.
The plaintiffs claim the settlement agreement violates their Fifth Amendment due process rights, federal housing laws, and environmental regulations. They asked the court to block pending evictions and reinstate a 2021 decision that granted 20-year ranching leases to the operators.
"The defendants revised the 2021 ROD, established ranches, and those living there, to 20-year leases," said Patrick Burns of Hanson Bridgett, an attorney representing the workers. "Our legal theory that the entire process that culminated in the settlement and the agreement to end ranches does not satisfy due process."
During the dismissal hearing, Judge Chesney expressed skepticism about several aspects of the workers' legal claims. She particularly questioned their argument that the evictions would violate the National Environmental Policy Act because displacing the workers could harm the environment.
The workers contended that losing their housing would force them to live outdoors, potentially increasing wildfire risks and creating environmental waste problems. Chesney rejected this reasoning, stating that the plaintiffs lack standing to bring such claims.
"As I read it, there is no NEPA claim. The plaintiffs do not have standing," the judge said. She added that the argument connecting the workers' interests to environmental injury "simply does not work."
The judge also focused on the plaintiffs' allegations that the evictions discriminated against agricultural workers, though the court record indicates she noted issues with how this claim was presented in the complaint.
Point Reyes National Seashore has been the site of a long-running dispute between environmental advocates seeking to protect native wildlife and restore natural habitats, and ranching families who have operated cattle operations on the land for generations. The 71,000-acre park, established in 1962, encompasses both pristine coastal wilderness and working agricultural lands.
Environmental groups have argued that cattle ranching damages sensitive ecosystems and threatens endangered species, including the Point Reyes salamander and California red-legged frog. They contend that removing livestock will allow native vegetation to recover and wildlife populations to rebound.
Ranching advocates maintain that their operations are sustainable and have coexisted with the natural environment for decades. They argue that agricultural activities contribute to the area's cultural heritage and provide economic benefits to the local community.
The January 2025 settlement represented a compromise between the federal government and environmental organizations after years of litigation. Under the agreement, most ranching leases will be terminated by early 2026, though some limited agricultural activities may continue in designated areas.
The settlement included financial compensation for ranch owners to help them transition away from their Point Reyes operations. However, the agricultural workers employed by these ranches were not included in the compensation framework, leading to their separate legal challenge.
With Friday's dismissal, the workers must now decide whether to file an amended complaint addressing the judge's concerns or pursue other legal options. Chesney's decision to grant leave to amend suggests she believes the workers might be able to strengthen their arguments with additional factual allegations or different legal theories.
The case highlights the complex social and economic impacts of environmental conservation efforts, particularly on working-class communities whose livelihoods depend on activities that may conflict with habitat protection goals. As federal agencies increasingly prioritize environmental restoration, similar disputes may arise at other national parks and public lands where commercial activities operate under federal permits.
The workers have not yet indicated whether they will file an amended complaint or what changes they might make to address the court's concerns about standing and legal theories.