Congress kills Minnesota land protection, opens federal lands to mining
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. · Filed by Pete Stauber (R-MN) · 4 cosponsors · Introduced Jan 12, 2026 · 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 2023 Bureau of Land Management rule withdrawing federal lands in three Minnesota counties (Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis) from mining and development. The resolution reverses the withdrawal, returning those lands to potential mineral extraction and other commercial uses.
Why we flagged it
The bill's functional effect is to reverse a federal land withdrawal that protected three Minnesota counties from mining and development, opening those lands to commercial extraction. This is a straightforward deregulatory measure favoring extractive industries over conservation.
What the text implies
- Reversal of the withdrawal may trigger new mining permit applications and environmental review processes, shifting the burden of proof from applicants to conservation advocates.
- The disapproval affects federal lands held in public trust; reversal transfers effective control from the Interior Department to private mineral-rights holders and extractive companies.
- Minnesota counties and tribal nations with interests in the withdrawn lands lose a federal-level protection mechanism and must now challenge individual extraction permits rather than relying on the blanket withdrawal.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The disapproval removes protections on federal lands that were withdrawn to prevent mining and development, opening them to commercial extraction and use. Citizens in affected regions lose environmental and conservation protections, and the public loses control over federal resource management in favor of private extraction interests.
Who stands to gain
- mining companies
- mineral extraction contractors
- timber and forestry operators
- oil and gas exploration firms
Named in the bill
Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior, Public Land Order No. 7917, Cook County Minnesota, Lake County Minnesota, Saint Louis County Minnesota, Congressional Review Act
Where it stands
4 cosponsors: 4 Republicans.
- Jan 12, 2026 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Jan 12, 2026 — Referred to House Committee on Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources”
- Jan 21, 2026 — Passed the House · Congress.gov: “On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 214 - 208 (Roll no. 38). (text: CR H1147)”
- Apr 16, 2026 — Passed both chambers · Congress.gov: “Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 50 - 49. Record Vote Number: 84”
- Apr 17, 2026 — Sent to president · Congress.gov: “Presented to President”
- Apr 27, 2026 — Signed into law · Congress.gov: “Became Public Law No: 119-85”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
13 lobbying clients named this bill on 15 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Mar 2026 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $3,740,524 in lobbying spend. A filing names 27 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 94% of bills with at least one filing.
Pete Stauber, the sponsor, reported $991,374 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Nature Conservancy — $900,000 on 1 filing
- National Mining Association — $820,000 on 1 filing
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters — $489,143 on 1 filing
- Earthjustice Action — $376,600 on 2 filings
- Building and Construction Trades Dept AFL-CIO — $290,000 on 1 filing
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the bill text published by Congress.gov (1,215 characters) on Jul 10, 2026. Section numbers in the findings refer to that text, linked below; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Mar 2026 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Congress kills Minnesota land protection, opens federal lands to mining” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hjres140 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.