HR-7159-119
Subcommittee Hearings Held
Sponsored by Paul Gosar (R-AZ)
What it does
This bill would amend the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 to expand the list of entities and individuals exempt from the federal ban on possessing "prohibited wildlife species" (large predatory cats and similar animals). It would add Class B USDA-licensed dealers to the exemption list, broaden the definition of qualifying staff to include owners, executives, volunteers, and veterinary assistants, allow compliant facilities to import and export prohibited wildlife species to and from foreign entities, and create a process for entities that mistakenly registered under a prior provision to cancel that registration if they qualify for an existing exemption. It would also permanently remove snow leopards and clouded leopards — and their hybrids — from the definition of "prohibited wildlife species" entirely.
Who benefits
Zoos, sanctuaries, and exhibitors holding USDA Class B licenses who currently cannot legally possess prohibited wildlife species. Owners, executives, and volunteers at qualifying facilities who gain clearer legal standing. Veterinary assistants and technicians at those facilities who would be explicitly covered. Facilities that breed, house, or exhibit snow leopards or clouded leopards, including AZA-accredited zoos with conservation programs for those species. Entities that previously registered under the Big Cat Public Safety Act's "mistaken registration" pathway and believe they qualify for a broader exemption. Foreign zoos and wildlife facilities that partner with U.S. institutions for animal transfers.
Who is hurt
Animal welfare organizations that supported the Big Cat Public Safety Act (2022) and view these changes as weakening its restrictions. Wildlife trafficking enforcement agencies, as a broader exemption pool may complicate oversight. Competing facilities that already comply with the stricter current law and may face new competition from newly exempted entities. Snow leopards and clouded leopards themselves, according to conservation critics who argue removing them from the prohibited list reduces protections. The public, to the extent that broader exemptions increase the number of large predatory animals held in less-regulated settings.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that the Big Cat Public Safety Act (2022) was drafted too broadly and inadvertently swept in legitimate, long-operating zoos, sanctuaries, and educational facilities that pose no public safety risk. They contend that snow leopards and clouded leopards are not the large, dangerous big cats the original law targeted — they are smaller, endangered species central to AZA-accredited conservation breeding programs — and that their inclusion was a legislative error that has disrupted critical international conservation partnerships. Expanding the staff exemption to include volunteers and veterinary technicians, they argue, simply reflects the reality of how accredited facilities operate.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that the Big Cat Public Safety Act (2022) was enacted specifically to close loopholes that allowed private owners and roadside zoos to exploit exemptions, and that this bill recreates those loopholes by expanding the exemption categories and eligible personnel. They contend that adding Class B USDA licensees — a category that has historically included dealers and exhibitors with documented animal welfare violations — undermines the law's core purpose. Removing snow leopards and clouded leopards from the prohibited list, they argue, could open pathways for private possession and trafficking of endangered species under the guise of conservation, weakening both domestic enforcement and U.S. obligations under CITES.
Constitutional context
The Lacey Act rests on Congress's Commerce Clause authority (Art. I, §8, cl. 3) to regulate interstate and international wildlife trafficking. This bill modifies an existing statutory framework rather than creating new agency authority, so it does not raise major questions doctrine concerns under West Virginia v. EPA (2022) or post-Loper Bright scrutiny — Congress itself is acting, not an agency expanding its own jurisdiction.
Checks and balances
Congress narrows the scope of the existing prohibition; the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (executive branch) retains authority to administer registrations and review cancellation applications; courts retain jurisdiction to hear enforcement challenges under the amended statute.
Historical precedent
The Big Cat Public Safety Act (2022) established the current prohibition on private possession of prohibited wildlife species that this bill would amend, and was itself a response to years of documented enforcement gaps in the Animal Welfare Act's regulation of big cat exhibitors.