Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Forest Service of the Department of Agriculture relating to "Law Enforcement; Criminal Prohibitions".
- Bill Number
- H.J.Res. 36
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Public Lands and Natural Resources
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-02-14: Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry and Horticulture.
- Last Updated
- 2025-12-05T21:58:13Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This joint resolution (H.J. Res. 36) aims to block a specific rule proposed by the Forest Service, part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It uses the Congressional Review Act (a law allowing Congress to review and overturn certain federal agency rules) to disapprove the rule titled "Law Enforcement; Criminal Prohibitions," which was published in the Federal Register on November 25, 2024. The goal is to prevent this rule from becoming effective.
Key Provisions
- Disapproval Authority: The resolution formally disapproves the Forest Service rule under Chapter 8 of Title 5 of the U.S. Code (the Congressional Review Act).
- Nullification: If enacted, the rule would have no legal force or effect, meaning it could not be implemented or enforced.
- Sponsors and Referral: Introduced on February 5, 2025, by Representative Maloy (R-UT) and co-sponsors from Republican districts; referred to the House Committee on Agriculture for review.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- This resolution does not amend broader laws but targets a single agency rule for reversal.
- It invokes the Congressional Review Act to override the Forest Service's rulemaking process, which normally allows agencies to create enforceable regulations without direct congressional approval.
- If passed and signed (or if Congress overrides a veto), it would retroactively invalidate the rule, prohibiting the agency from issuing a "substantially similar" rule in the future without new congressional authorization.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: The Forest Service would lose authority to enforce the new criminal prohibitions outlined in the rule, potentially limiting its ability to regulate certain activities on public lands like national forests. This could require the agency to rely on existing laws for law enforcement.
- On Citizens: Individuals using national forests for recreation, hunting, or other activities (e.g., campers, off-road vehicle users) might face fewer new restrictions or penalties, depending on the rule's specifics. However, it could also mean continued vulnerabilities if the rule aimed to address safety or environmental issues.
- On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the rule pertains to domestic land management.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agency: The Forest Service (Department of Agriculture), which proposed the rule to strengthen criminal enforcement on public lands.
- Congress: Members of the House Committee on Agriculture and sponsors, who seek to exercise oversight over executive branch actions.
- Public Land Users: Citizens, including recreational users, hunters, loggers, and environmental groups, who could be subject to (or protected from) the rule's prohibitions.
- Law Enforcement: Forest Service officers and local authorities responsible for upholding regulations in national forests.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces the Congressional Review Act as a tool for quick congressional intervention in agency rulemaking, ensuring rules do not take effect if disapproved within a set timeframe (typically 60 legislative days). The resolution could face challenges if the rule's publication date affects the review window.
- Constitutional: Highlights the separation of powers, with Congress checking executive branch authority over federal lands (managed under Article IV's property clause of the Constitution).
- Political: Introduced in the 119th Congress (2025-2026) by Republican lawmakers, it reflects partisan efforts to limit perceived overreach by the prior administration's agencies; passage would require simple majorities in both chambers and presidential approval (or veto override), potentially signaling broader debates on federal land management.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (6)
Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4], Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large], Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large], Rep. Fulcher, Russ [R-ID-1], Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3], Rep. Moore, Blake D. [R-UT-1]
Recent Actions
- 2025-02-14: Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry and Horticulture.
- 2025-02-05: Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
- 2025-02-05: Introduced in House
- 2025-02-05: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Forest Service of the Department of Agriculture relating to "Law Enforcement; Criminal Prohibitions". — issued 2025-02-05 — PDF (2 pages)