S-90-119
Committee on Energy and Natural Resources. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
Sponsored by Mike Lee (R-UT)
What it does
This bill would prohibit the Bureau of Land Management from spending federal funds to finalize or implement new travel management plans for ten specific travel management areas in Utah, and from implementing four already-designated travel management plans, until 22 pending R.S. 2477 road right-of-way lawsuits between Utah counties/the state and the federal government are fully resolved. The restriction lifts once the Secretary of the Interior certifies to Congress that all listed cases have been adjudicated.
Who benefits
Utah counties and the State of Utah pursuing R.S. 2477 right-of-way claims, off-highway vehicle users, ranchers, and rural residents who rely on existing dirt roads and trails across BLM land for access; local economies dependent on motorized recreation and resource access in areas like the San Rafael Swell and Book Cliffs.
Who is hurt
Conservation groups and wildlife advocates who favor limiting motorized access to protect wilderness-quality lands, hikers and non-motorized recreationists seeking reduced vehicle traffic, BLM staff and planning processes that would be stalled indefinitely, and the general public interest in updated resource management given that finalized travel plans often reduce unauthorized route proliferation.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that finalizing travel management plans before decades-old R.S. 2477 right-of-way litigation is resolved risks permanently closing roads that courts may later confirm belong to the counties, creating irreversible harm to historic access rights. They contend it is prudent to pause federal action on these routes so that county and state property claims, some pending since 2012, are not mooted by administrative decisions made while litigation is unresolved.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that indefinitely freezing travel management planning could leave sensitive lands unprotected from unmanaged off-road vehicle use, erosion, and habitat damage for years while the 22 lawsuits work through the courts. They contend the bill lets litigation over a small number of contested routes block comprehensive planning for entire travel management areas, undermining BLM's statutory obligation under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act to manage public lands for multiple uses.
Constitutional context
Congress's spending power under Article I, Section 8 allows it to restrict how appropriated funds are used by federal agencies, and the Property Clause (Art. IV, §3) gives Congress authority over federal lands, so this funding restriction sits within well-established legislative authority rather than raising a novel constitutional question.
Checks and balances
Congress would use its power of the purse to constrain executive agency action (BLM/Interior) pending resolution of ongoing federal court litigation, with the judiciary independently deciding the underlying R.S. 2477 property claims.
Historical precedent
Congress has previously used appropriations riders to restrict Interior Department land-use actions pending litigation or study, though this specific pause tied to the 22 R.S. 2477 cases has no direct prior analogue.