Trust the Science Act
- Bill Number
- H.R. 130
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Animals
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-01-03: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Last Updated
- 2025-03-03T14:18:04Z
AI-Generated Summary
Summary of H.R. 130: Trust the Science Act
Purpose
This bill aims to mandate the removal of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the list of endangered and threatened species under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. It seeks to reinstate a previous regulatory decision based on assessments of the species' population recovery, emphasizing reliance on scientific evaluations for wildlife management.
Key Provisions
- Short Title: The Act is titled the "Trust the Science Act."
- Reissuance Requirement: Within 60 days of the bill's enactment, the Secretary of the Interior must reissue the final rule from November 3, 2020 (published in the Federal Register at 85 Fed. Reg. 69778), which removes the gray wolf from the endangered and threatened wildlife list.
- Judicial Review Prohibition: The reissuance of this rule cannot be challenged in court, preventing legal disputes over the decision.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- The bill overrides any prior court rulings, settlements, or administrative actions that may have reinstated protections for the gray wolf since the 2020 delisting rule.
- It introduces a statutory mandate for re-delisting, bypassing the usual administrative rulemaking process under the Endangered Species Act, which typically involves public comment, scientific review, and potential litigation.
- By prohibiting judicial review, it alters standard legal protections against agency actions, limiting avenues for challenges under the Administrative Procedure Act or Endangered Species Act.
Potential Impacts
- Government Agencies: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (under the Department of the Interior) would face a tight deadline to implement the delisting, potentially shifting resources from ongoing wolf monitoring to state-level management programs. This could streamline federal oversight but reduce federal involvement in wolf conservation.
- Citizens: Residents in wolf-populated areas (e.g., Midwest and Western states) might see changes in wildlife interactions, such as increased hunting opportunities or reduced protections against livestock predation. Ranchers could benefit from fewer regulatory restrictions on wolf control, while environmental advocates might face challenges in protecting wolf habitats.
- International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it could influence U.S. commitments under international wildlife treaties like the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), if wolf populations near borders (e.g., with Canada or Mexico) are affected.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- Federal Agencies: Secretary of the Interior and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, responsible for executing the reissuance.
- State Governments: Wildlife agencies in states like Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, and Minnesota, which manage wolf populations and could gain more authority over hunting and control measures.
- Livestock Owners and Ranchers: Likely to support delisting due to reduced economic losses from wolf predation on cattle and sheep.
- Conservation Groups and Environmentalists: Opposed, as they advocate for continued federal protections to prevent population declines.
- Hunters and Sportsmen: Potentially benefited by expanded hunting seasons and quotas.
- Indigenous Communities: Some tribes may be impacted if wolves hold cultural significance or if management affects traditional lands.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: The ban on judicial review raises questions about due process and access to courts, potentially conflicting with Article III of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees judicial oversight of executive actions. It could be seen as an attempt to insulate a policy decision from standard legal scrutiny under environmental laws.
- Constitutional: By directing a specific agency action and limiting review, the bill tests the balance of powers between Congress and the executive branch, as well as between branches and the judiciary.
- Political: The title "Trust the Science Act" frames the legislation as science-based, but it may spark debates over selective use of scientific data on wolf recovery. As an introduced bill in the 119th Congress (2025), it reflects ongoing partisan divides on environmental regulation, with implications for future wildlife policy if enacted.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Recent Actions
- 2025-01-03: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- 2025-01-03: Introduced in House
- 2025-01-03: Introduced in House
Bill Versions
- Trust the Science Act — issued 2025-01-03 — PDF (2 pages)