Ron Johnson (R-WI)
A bill to require the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to reissue a final rule removing the gray wolf from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.
A Republican bill with 3 Republican cosponsors · See all 3 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill requires the Director of the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to take a specific action. The Director must reissue a final rule that removes the gray wolf from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife under the Endangered Species Act of 1973. This reissuance must occur no later than 60 days after the Act is enacted. Additionally, the bill specifies that this reissuance cannot be subject to judicial review.
Yes
- Scored +4
Would farmers be better off under this?
Removing species protections often eases land management and usage for agricultural interests.
- Scored +3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Reducing wildlife protections can decrease regulatory burdens for land owners and business owners.
- Scored +3
Would people in rural areas be better off under this?
Rural residents often benefit from reduced federal wildlife regulations on local lands.
The opposite· 3 of 5
- Scored -5
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill explicitly removes judicial review, which limits due process for those challenging the rule.
- Scored -5
Does this better protect air, water and wildlife?
Removing species from the endangered list generally reduces overall environmental protections for those species.
- Scored -4
Would Native Americans be better off under this?
Removing protections for native species may negatively impact traditional land use and ecosystems.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Removal of Gray Wolf Protections: The bill mandates the reissuance of a rule that removes the gray wolf from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Section 1(a)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Limitation on Legal Oversight: The reissuance of the final rule will not be subject to judicial review (Section 1(b)).
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.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill explicitly removes judicial review, which limits due process for those challenging the rule. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Eliminating judicial review reduces transparency and accountability for agency decisions. Does this give the federal government more power? — The removal of judicial review limits the ability of the legal system to check executive agency actions.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would farmers be better off under this? — Removing species protections often eases land management and usage for agricultural interests. Would business owners be better off under this? — Reducing wildlife protections can decrease regulatory burdens for land owners and business owners. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Rural residents often benefit from reduced federal wildlife regulations on local lands. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Removing protections for native species may negatively impact traditional land use and ecosystems.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this better protect air, water and wildlife? — Removing species from the endangered list generally reduces overall environmental protections for those species.
- 4/8/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 4/4/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
John BarrassoRepublican · Wyoming
Cynthia LummisRepublican · Wyoming
Mike LeeRepublican · Utah