Congress kills Montana land-management rule—but what was in it?
H.J.Res. 104 — 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 "Miles City Field Office Record of Decision and Approved Resource Management Plan Amendment". · Filed by Troy Downing (R-MT) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Jul 10, 2025 · Signed
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This is a Congressional Review Act (CRA) disapproval resolution that kills a Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rule issued in November 2024 governing the Miles City Field Office's resource management plan. The rule, which the GAO determined qualifies as a reviewable rule under the CRA, is hereby voided and will have no legal force. Congress is using its statutory power to overturn an executive agency decision about how federal land in Montana will be managed.
Why we flagged it
This is a procedural CRA resolution—a one-sentence legislative instrument that exercises Congress's statutory power to disapprove and void an executive agency rule. It is not substantive legislation; it is a veto of a prior agency action.
What the text implies
- If the BLM rule permitted oil, gas, or mineral leasing on federal lands in the Miles City Field Office area, disapproval removes environmental and planning constraints and may accelerate extraction. If the rule restricted such uses, disapproval removes those restrictions.
- The GAO opinion (June 25, 2025) determined the BLM action qualifies as a 'rule' under the CRA, meaning it was subject to congressional review. This suggests the BLM may have attempted to implement the plan amendment without formal rulemaking, and Congress is now asserting its CRA authority.
The full analysis lists 4 implications of this text.
Who stands to gain
oil and gas companies (if the disapproved rule restricted leasing); mining companies (if the disapproved rule restricted mineral extraction); livestock operators (if the disapproved rule restricted grazing)