A Republican bill with no cosponsors
Last activity — Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
In the other chamber's committee
Passed one chamber and has been handed to a committee in the other.
The committee decides whether it goes any further, and most bills that reach a committee never leave it. A committee that simply does nothing kills a bill without anyone ever voting against it, so no news from here is usually the news.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed House voice vote
- In Senate committee
The House by voice vote (members called out yes or no together): no member's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
The Expedited Appeals Review Act, or "EARA," creates a process to speed up the review of certain Department of the Interior decisions. Parties can notify the Board of Land Appeals that they want an expedited review. The Board must then issue a final decision within 6 months of that notice, though the deadline cannot be sooner than 18 months after the appeal was first filed. If the Board misses this deadline, the decision is considered a final agency action. In such cases, judicial review of the decision will be de novo. This law applies to appeals already pending or filed after the Act is passed.
Yes· 3 of 13
- Scored +5
Would business owners be better off under this?
Significant benefit for business owners facing costly delays in land-use approvals.
- Scored +5
Would farmers be better off under this?
Highly beneficial for agricultural operators dealing with DOI land appeals.
- Scored +4
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Positive impact for those living and working on federal or leased land in rural areas.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Expediting reviews may reduce the time available for thorough environmental impact considerations.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Faster Decision Timelines: Under Section 2(a), parties can request an expedited review, forcing the Board of Land Appeals to issue a final decision within 6 months of the written notice. This reduces the time people must wait for a resolution.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Strict Deadlines Overriding Other Laws: Section 2(d) states that the deadlines in this Act will control even if they conflict with the Federal Oil and Gas Royalty Management Act of 1982 or the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977. This could override existing legal timelines provided in those specific acts.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would business owners be better off under this? — Significant benefit for business owners facing costly delays in land-use approvals. Would farmers be better off under this? — Highly beneficial for agricultural operators dealing with DOI land appeals. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Positive impact for those living and working on federal or leased land in rural areas. Would billionaires be better off under this? — Beneficial for those with the resources to file and pursue land appeals. Would high-income households be better off under this? — Beneficial for those with the resources to file and pursue land appeals. Would people with substantial wealth be better off under this? — Beneficial for those with the resources to file and pursue land appeals. Would the very wealthiest people be better off under this? — Beneficial for those with the resources to file and pursue land appeals.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — Provides a guarantee of timely resolution and allows for de novo judicial review if deadlines are missed. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Increases agency accountability by mandating strict deadlines for final decisions.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to grow the economy? — Faster resolution of land and resource appeals can accelerate economic development projects. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Reduces administrative delays for businesses appealing Department of the Interior decisions.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect public land such as parks and forests? — Establishes clear, expedited timelines for resolving land-use disputes. Does this invest in rural communities? — Faster resolution of land appeals can facilitate rural development projects. Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Expediting reviews may reduce the time available for thorough environmental impact considerations.
- 9/30/2026
- Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
- 2/12/2026
- Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on Public Lands, Forests, and Mining. Hearings held. With printed Hearing: S.Hrg. 119-305.
- 5/14/2025
- Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
- 5/13/2025
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1973)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H1973)
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 677.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1973-1974)
- Mr. Westerman moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
- 5/5/2025
- Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Natural Resources. H. Rept. 119-88.
- Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 63.
- 4/9/2025
- Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
- Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by Unanimous Consent.
- 1/23/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
- Introduced in House