H.J.Res.140 — Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Public Land Order No. 7917 for Withdrawal of Federal Lands; Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis Counties, MN
House Roll Call
H.J.Res.140
| Bill | H.J.Res.140 — Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to Public Land Order No. 7917 for Withdrawal of Federal Lands; Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis Counties, MN |
|---|---|
| Vote question | On Passage |
| Vote type | Yea-and-Nay |
| Result | Passed |
| Totals | Yea 214 / Nay 208 / Present 0 / Not Voting 9 |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R | 213 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| D | 1 | 207 | 0 | 5 |
| I | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Research Brief
On Passage
Bill Analysis
HJ.Res. 140 is a joint resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) targeting a specific Bureau of Land Management (BLM) public land order affecting federal lands in northeastern Minnesota.
Substantive target: The resolution seeks to nullify BLM’s “Public Land Order No. 7917 for Withdrawal of Federal Lands; Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis Counties, MN.” That order withdrew certain federal lands and minerals from new mineral and geothermal leasing, location, and entry—effectively restricting new mining-related activities on designated tracts near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness.
Legal mechanism: Using chapter 8 of title 5, U.S. Code (CRA), Congress may disapprove a recently issued agency rule via a joint resolution. If enacted and signed by the President (or passed over a veto), the rule “shall have no force or effect,” and the agency is barred from issuing a substantially similar rule without new statutory authorization.
What HJ.Res. 140 does:
- Declares congressional disapproval of BLM’s Public Land Order 7917.
- Provides that the public land order “shall have no force or effect” if the resolution becomes law.
- By implication, would reopen the affected federal lands to mineral and related activities under pre‑existing authorities, unless otherwise restricted by other law.
Agencies and programs affected:
- Bureau of Land Management (Department of the Interior): loses the effect of its withdrawal order for the specified Minnesota lands.
- Indirectly affects Forest Service land management and mineral leasing programs where they intersect with the withdrawn tracts.
Who is affected:
- Beneficiaries of disapproval: mining and mineral exploration companies; associated local economic interests seeking access to federal minerals.
- Those adversely affected by disapproval: environmental and conservation interests; recreation and tourism stakeholders relying on long-term withdrawal protections.
Funding/appropriations: The resolution does not authorize or appropriate funds; it is purely regulatory/oversight in effect.
Timelines and procedure:
- Subject to CRA timelines (expedited Senate procedures, limited debate).
- Latest action: House Rules Committee reported H. Res. 1009, providing a closed rule for floor consideration of HJ.Res. 140 with one hour of debate and one motion to recommit. Enactment requires passage by both chambers and presidential approval or veto override.
Yea (214)
K
Ken Calvert
S
Scott Franklin
L
Lisa McClain
J
John Rutherford
D
David Schweikert
P
Pete Sessions
Nay (208)
J
Jason Crow
L
Lloyd Doggett
J
John Garamendi
J
John Mannion
L
Lucy McBath
R
Rashida Tlaib
N
Nydia Velázquez
D
Debbie Wasserman Schultz
