Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 285.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to reissue, within 60 days, the November 3, 2020 final rule that removed the gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the Endangered Species Act listing. It also bars any judicial review of that reissuance.
Conservation vs. property-rights emphasis on wolf protection.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive policy change that uses a precise administrative directive to achieve its effect.
The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to reissue, within 60 days, the November 3, 2020 final rule that removed the gray wolf (Canis lupus) from the Endangered Species Act listing.
It also bars any judicial review of that reissuance.
No other regulatory details or funding provisions are included in the text.
Narrow but partisan and legally contentious; Senate supermajority and executive approval or litigation risk reduce odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive policy change that uses a precise administrative directive to achieve its effect. The core mechanism is clearly and specifically stated, but the bill lacks fiscal, oversight, and broader legal‑integration detail.
Conservation vs. property-rights emphasis on wolf protection.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Conservation vs. property-rights emphasis on wolf protection.
Likely opposed.
Supporters of species protection would view mandatory delisting and the bar on judicial review as a rollback of federal conservation safeguards.
They would worry the bill preempts science-based recovery and limits legal checks on agency action.
Mixed or cautious.
A centrist would see administrative clarity and state management benefits, but be concerned about eliminating judicial review and potential ecological consequences.
They would seek safeguards: monitoring, state plans, and funding for coexistence.
Likely supportive.
Conservatives favor reducing federal oversight, restoring state control, and easing burdens on livestock owners.
The prohibition on judicial review is attractive as a way to prevent litigation delays to management and protect property interests.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow but partisan and legally contentious; Senate supermajority and executive approval or litigation risk reduce odds.
The House passed this bill. It now goes to the other chamber, and eventually to the President for signature.
The final vote on whether the bill becomes law (pending the other chamber and the President).
The attempt to send the bill back to committee failed. The bill continues moving forward.
A motion to recommit sends a bill back to committee, often as a last-ditch attempt to stop it.
Conservation vs. property-rights emphasis on wolf protection.
Narrow but partisan and legally contentious; Senate supermajority and executive approval or litigation risk reduce odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a focused substantive policy change that uses a precise administrative directive to achieve its effect. The core mechanism is clearly and specifically stated, but…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.