Summary

Louis Brandeis Omaechevarria v. Idaho — Opinion of the Court

The incidental protection which it thereby affords to cattle owners does not purport to secure to any of them, or to cattle owners collectively, 'the exclusive use and occupancy of any part of the public lands.' For every range from which sheep are excluded remains open not only to all cattle, but also to horses, of which there are many in Idaho. [15] This exclusion of sheep owners under certain circumstances does not interefere with any rights of a citizen of the Unite States. Congress has not conferred upon citizens the right to graze stock upon the public lands.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis Omaechevarria v. Idaho — Opinion of the Court

Privileges of citizens of the United States, in so far as it prohibits the use of the public lands by sheep owners; and equal protection of the laws, in that it gives to cattle owners a preference over sheep owners. These contentions are, in substance, the same as those made in respect to the 'Two Mile Limit Law' in Bacon v. Walker, supra; and the answer made there is applicable here. The police power of the state extends over the federal public domain, at least when there is no legislation by Congress on the subject.
Source: Wikisource

Louis Brandeis Omaechevarria v. Idaho — Opinion of the Court

It is also urged that the Idaho statute, being a criminal one is so indefinite in its terms as to violate the guaranty by the Fourteenth Amendment of due process of law, since it fails to provide for the ascertainment of the boundaries of a 'range' or for determining what length of time is necessary to constitute a prior occupation a 'usual' one within the meaning of the act. Men familiar with range conditions and desirous of observing the law will have little difficulty in determining what is prohibited by it.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature