Skip to content
USA DAILY NEWS 24
national-news

Senate Kills 20-Year Mining Ban Near Boundary Waters

A 50-49 vote approves a Congressional Review Act resolution nullifying the federal land withdrawal that shielded the Rainy River watershed from copper-nickel mining.

Senate Kills 20-Year Mining Ban Near Boundary Waters
The Senate's 50-49 vote on April 16, 2026 voided the 20-year federal mining withdrawal upstream of the Boundary Waters.

The Senate voted 50-49 on April 16, 2026 to pass H.J.Res. 140, a Congressional Review Act resolution that nullifies Public Land Order 7917 — the federal withdrawal that barred mineral and geothermal leasing on 225,504 acres in Minnesota's Rainy River watershed for 20 years. The Stauber resolution cleared the House on January 21, 2026, per the congressional record.

What did the land withdrawal actually do?

Signed in the final weeks of the Biden administration, Public Land Order 7917 withdrew the federal acreage in Cook, Lake and St. Louis counties — land within the Superior National Forest upstream of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness — from new mineral and geothermal leasing for two decades. The withdrawal did not ban mining on state or private land, and it did not revoke existing leases; it fenced new federal lease applications out of the watershed that drains into the Boundary Waters, a canoe wilderness whose economics depend on undisturbed water.

Why use the Congressional Review Act for it?

The CRA lets Congress void recently issued federal rules by simple majority vote, outside the filibuster, and — the feature that makes the tool potent — it bars agencies from reissuing a substantially similar rule. Land orders issued in the waning months of an administration qualify under the law's timing windows, which is why the resolution needed only 50 votes plus the vice president rather than the 60 votes a standalone bill would demand. Supporters in the Minnesota delegation called the withdrawal an end-run around Congress's mining laws; opponents called the resolution a way to kill a protection without the votes to legislate one.

Related stories: Senate Confirms Todd Blanche as Attorney General 50-49 · Senate Passes $70 Billion Immigration Enforcement Package.

What does nullifying the order mean on the ground?

With PLO 7917 voided, the Bureau of Land Management returns to the pre-withdrawal status quo, in which companies may again apply for federal mineral leases in the watershed — a process controlled by BLM leasing decisions and environmental review rather than by the blanket bar. Whether copper-nickel projects actually advance depends on permitting outcomes that take years, and state permitting adds another gate. The vote does not itself approve any mine, and it does not affect the Boundary Waters wilderness itself, which remains closed to development under separate law.

What does this change?

The vote is the first CRA of the 119th Congress aimed at a land-order, and its template is transferable: any late-administration withdrawal, on any federal acreage, is now visibly vulnerable to the same simple-majority reversal. Environmental groups have pledged litigation over the resolution's application to land orders as opposed to rules, a question the CRA's text does not cleanly answer. Minnesota's congressional split — the 8th District celebrating, wilderness-adjacent districts objecting — keeps the region's mining question on the ballot again in November.

Frequently Asked Questions

What did the Senate vote on April 16, 2026 do?
By a 50-49 vote the Senate passed H.J.Res. 140, a Congressional Review Act resolution nullifying Public Land Order 7917. That order had withdrawn 225,504 acres of federal land in Minnesota's Rainy River watershed from new mineral and geothermal leasing for 20 years. The House passed the resolution on January 21, 2026, and it now heads to the president.
Does this allow mining in the Boundary Waters?
No. The Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness itself remains protected as federal wilderness under separate statutes and is untouched by the resolution. The vote lifts the 20-year withdrawal on surrounding federal acreage, which reopens that land to new federal mineral lease applications subject to Bureau of Land Management review, environmental analysis and state permitting — a process measured in years.
Why did this need only 50 votes?
The Congressional Review Act lets a simple majority in each chamber disapprove recently issued federal agency actions, with no filibuster and no amendment, and forbids agencies from reissuing substantially similar actions. Public Land Order 7917 was issued in the final weeks of the prior administration, placing it inside the CRA's timing window, so the Senate needed 50 votes plus the vice president rather than 60.
Could a future administration restore the withdrawal?
Not easily, and that is the point of the tool. The CRA bars reissuance of a rule or action in substantially the same form, so a later administration seeking to protect the watershed would need a differently constructed action, new legislation, or a new withdrawal justified on a different record. Litigation over whether land orders fit the CRA at all could reshape that constraint.