Geothermal permits fast-tracked even as lawsuits challenging them proceed
H.R. 301 — GEO Act · Filed by Celeste Maloy (R-UT) · 7 cosponsors · Introduced Jan 9, 2025 · Reported out
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 bill amends the Geothermal Steam Act of 1970 to require the federal government to approve or deny geothermal drilling permits and related authorizations within 60 days of completing environmental reviews, even if lawsuits challenging the lease are pending. The bill does not prevent courts from blocking permits through injunctions or vacating leases, but it prevents pending litigation from delaying the agency's decision-making process.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core mechanism is procedural: it mandates a 60-day decision timeline for geothermal permits regardless of pending litigation. This is a permitting-speed reform, not a substantive environmental deregulation, though it does alter the practical relationship between litigation and agency action.
What the text implies
- Permits may be issued and construction may commence while underlying legal challenges (environmental, property-rights, or lease-validity claims) remain unresolved in court, creating a 'fait accompli' dynamic that may disadvantage plaintiffs.
- The 60-day clock runs from completion of NEPA and ESA reviews, not from filing of the application, but the bill does not define who determines when 'all requirements' are complete—potential for agency discretion in clock-starting.
- Geothermal projects on federal lands may proceed to construction phase while judicial review of the lease itself is still pending, separating permit issuance from lease validity in a way that may complicate later injunctive relief.
- The bill preserves court authority to vacate leases or issue injunctions but does not require the agency to pause permitting pending the outcome of such challenges, creating a race between construction and litigation.
Section numbers refer to the bill text the analysis read — linked under Primary records below.
Who it affects
The bill accelerates permitting for geothermal energy, which may reduce energy costs and support renewable energy development—a public benefit. However, it creates a procedural advantage for permit applicants by decoupling agency approval from the outcome of pending legal challenges, potentially allowing projects to proceed while environmental or property-rights claims are still being litigated, which may harm citizens whose interests are at stake in those lawsuits.
Who stands to gain
- geothermal energy developers and operators
- renewable energy companies with geothermal portfolios
- engineering and construction firms serving geothermal projects
Named in the bill
Geothermal Steam Act of 1970, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Endangered Species Act (ESA), U.S. Federal courts, Federal agencies (permitting authorities), geothermal lease holders
Where it stands
7 cosponsors: 4 Republicans, 3 Democrats.
- Jan 9, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Jan 9, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Natural Resources · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources”
- Dec 16, 2025 — Hearing held · Congress.gov: “Subcommittee Hearings Held”
- Mar 5, 2026 — Markup held in committee · Congress.gov: “Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held”
- Mar 5, 2026 — Reported out of committee · Congress.gov: “Ordered to be Reported by Unanimous Consent”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
7 lobbying clients named this bill on 14 disclosure filings across 3 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $12,075,375 in lobbying spend. A filing names 20 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 86% of bills with at least one filing.
Celeste Maloy, the sponsor, reported $716,075 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Google Client Services LLC — $6,920,000 on 2 filings
- Fervo Energy Company — $2,220,000 on 4 filings
- Chevron U.S.A. Inc. — $1,670,000 on 1 filing
- Corporate Energy Buyers Association — $590,000 on 3 filings
- Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions, Inc. — $520,000 on 2 filings
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 21, 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 (2,011 characters) on Jul 25, 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 Dec 2025 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 21, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Geothermal permits fast-tracked even as lawsuits challenging them proceed” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr301 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.