HJRES-131-119
Became Public Law No: 119-52.
Sponsored by Nicholas Begich (R-AK)
What it does
This joint resolution, enacted under the Congressional Review Act, nullifies a December 2024 Bureau of Land Management rule that restricted oil and gas leasing in the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). The 2024 BLM rule had made approximately 1.2 million of the 1.6 million acres in the program area unavailable for leasing, leaving only the statutory minimum of 400,000 acres open. By nullifying that rule, this resolution restores the 2020 rule, which made all 1.6 million acres available for oil and gas leasing.
Who benefits
Oil and gas companies that hold or seek leases in the ANWR Coastal Plain program area. Alaska state government, which receives a share of federal oil and gas revenues. Alaska Native communities — particularly the Iñupiat — who have historically supported development for economic reasons. Energy sector workers and contractors in Alaska. Consumers and industries that could benefit from increased domestic oil supply. Federal government, which collects lease sale revenues.
Who is hurt
Environmental and conservation organizations that sought to limit drilling in ANWR. Alaska Native communities — particularly the Gwich'in Nation — who oppose drilling due to cultural and subsistence ties to the Porcupine caribou herd that calves in the Coastal Plain. Wildlife dependent on the Coastal Plain ecosystem, including caribou, polar bears, and migratory birds. Researchers and scientists studying the Arctic ecosystem. Competing renewable energy industries that may face a less favorable policy environment.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the 2020 leasing program was authorized by Congress in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which mandated at least two lease sales covering a minimum of 400,000 acres, and that the Biden administration's 2024 rule unlawfully restricted access beyond what Congress intended. They contend that restoring full access to 1.6 million acres advances U.S. energy security, generates federal and state revenue, and honors the economic interests of Iñupiat communities who have long supported responsible development of their homeland's resources.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the 2024 BLM rule reflected a thorough environmental review — including a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement — that identified specific areas requiring protection for wildlife, subsistence, and conservation purposes, and that nullifying it bypasses that scientific process. They contend that ANWR's Coastal Plain is one of the most ecologically sensitive areas in North America, that oil companies have already declined to develop existing leases due to financial risk, and that opening additional acreage provides marginal energy benefit while imposing irreversible environmental costs.
Constitutional context
The Congressional Review Act gives Congress authority to nullify agency rules by joint resolution under the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 18) and its broad legislative power. The underlying BLM leasing program was authorized by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts no longer defer to agency interpretations of their own statutory authority, meaning the 2024 BLM rule's restrictions — and any future rules — face independent judicial scrutiny as to whether they exceeded the agency's congressional mandate.
Checks and balances
Congress gains authority by nullifying the executive branch's 2024 BLM rule; the CRA also bars BLM from issuing a substantially similar rule without new congressional authorization, limiting future executive action in this area.
Historical precedent
Congress authorized ANWR Coastal Plain leasing in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 after decades of failed attempts; the Congressional Review Act has been used to nullify environmental rules before, most notably in 2017 when Congress struck down the Stream Protection Rule issued by the Office of Surface Mining.