The administration seeks to ease the burden on private landowners while still upholding current laws.
The Departments of the Interior (DOI) and Commerce (DOC) announced the rescission of a rule defining “harm” under the Endangered Species Act (ESA). The Interior Department explained that the retraction stemmed from a 2024 Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, which concluded that government agencies should follow the single best meaning of a statute, without influence from the Executive Branch’s opinions.
Previously, regulatory language defined “harm” as altering a species’s habitat to the point of food, shelter or breeding disruption. The department said that this interpretation of the rule was not only unlawful, but allowed for “regulatory intrusion” of private property rights. Under the new definitions, the Interior Department expects to decrease unnecessary permitting, cut compliance costs, and reduce confusion surrounding legislation.
“For years, federal agencies abused the ESA to obstruct lawful land use and burden American families and businesses,” said Interior Secretary Doug Burgum. “That approach turned routine activity into a regulatory trap, drove up costs that impacted people’s lives, and expanded federal authority beyond what Congress intended. This action restores common sense, respects private property, provides much-needed certainty for landowners and follows the statute Congress actually passed.”
As the Lord Leads, Pray with Us…
- For Secretary Doug Burgum as he continues reviews of current legislation and regulations that may hinder land development.
- For Interior and Commerce employees as they evaluate the interpretation of endangered species laws.
Sources: Department of the Interior, The Hill, The Supreme Court
