CLEAR Act of 2025

Bill Number

H.R. 6802

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Public Lands and Natural Resources

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-05-20: Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry and Horticulture.

Last Updated

2026-04-02T19:37:25Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose

The legislation aims to block the U.S. Forest Service (a part of the Department of Agriculture) from putting into effect a specific federal rule on law enforcement and criminal prohibitions. By doing so, it seeks to restore authority to local or community law enforcement agencies in handling certain matters on federal forest lands, preventing what the bill's sponsors view as overreach by federal rules.

Key Provisions

• Prohibition on Enforcement: The Forest Service is explicitly barred from administering, implementing, or enforcing the rule titled "Law Enforcement; Criminal Prohibitions," published in the Federal Register (89 Fed. Reg. 92808) on November 25, 2024.
• Nullification of the Rule: The rule is declared to have no legal force or effect, effectively canceling it through congressional action.
• Short Title: The bill is named the "Community Law Enforcement Authority Restoration Act of 2025" or the "CLEAR Act of 2025."

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• This bill would directly override an existing federal regulation issued by the Forest Service, which likely expanded federal criminal prohibitions or law enforcement powers on national forest lands (the exact details of the rule are not specified in the bill but refer to its Federal Register publication).
• It introduces a congressional limitation on agency rulemaking, shifting enforcement responsibilities away from federal authorities and potentially back to state or local levels, altering how crimes on federal lands are prosecuted or policed.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: The Forest Service would lose the ability to apply this rule, potentially reducing its direct role in law enforcement on managed lands and requiring coordination with local agencies instead. This could streamline operations but might create gaps in federal oversight.
• On Citizens: Individuals using national forests for recreation, work, or residence could see changes in how violations (e.g., environmental crimes or public safety issues) are handled, possibly leading to more localized policing that feels more responsive but less uniform.
• On International Relations: No direct impacts, as the bill focuses on domestic federal land management.
• Overall, it could affect public safety and resource protection on approximately 193 million acres of national forests, depending on how local enforcement fills the void.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Federal Agencies: Primarily the U.S. Forest Service and Department of Agriculture, which would be restricted in their regulatory powers.
• Local and State Law Enforcement: Community police and sheriffs' departments, who may gain expanded authority to enforce laws on federal lands without federal interference.
• Citizens and Users of Public Lands: Recreationists, landowners adjacent to forests, and businesses operating in or near national forests, who could experience shifts in legal accountability and enforcement consistency.
• Environmental and Advocacy Groups: Organizations focused on conservation or federal land rights, potentially opposing or supporting based on views of federal vs. local control.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal Implications: The bill uses congressional authority to invalidate an administrative rule, highlighting the balance between legislative oversight and executive agency rulemaking under the Administrative Procedure Act (a law governing how federal agencies create rules). If passed, it could set a precedent for Congress to target specific regulations without broader repeal processes.
• Constitutional Implications: It touches on federalism (the division of powers between federal and state governments), potentially reinforcing state and local roles in law enforcement on federal property, but it might raise questions about uniform application of federal laws across states.
• Political Implications: Introduced by a bipartisan group of representatives (mostly from Western states with significant federal lands), it reflects debates over federal land management and "states' rights," but the bill itself avoids partisan language, focusing solely on the rule's prohibition.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Maloy, Celeste [R-UT-2]

Cosponsors (7)

Rep. Fulcher, Russ [R-ID-1], Rep. Moore, Blake D. [R-UT-1], Rep. Owens, Burgess [R-UT-4], Rep. Kennedy, Mike [R-UT-3], Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large], Del. Moylan, James C. [R-GU-At Large], Rep. Van Orden, Derrick [R-WI-3]

Recent Actions

• 2026-05-20: Referred to the Subcommittee on Forestry and Horticulture.
• 2025-12-17: Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
• 2025-12-17: Introduced in House
• 2025-12-17: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Community Law Enforcement Authority Restoration Act of 2025 — issued 2025-12-17 — PDF (2 pages)