Published on:

by and

The Trump administration has unveiled the first 10 mining projects designated for accelerated federal permitting under Executive Order 14157, Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production, which prioritizes expedited permitting, federal land leasing, and funding of mining projects (discussed in our previous blogpost here). Published by the Federal Permitting Improvement Steering Council (Permitting Council), the list — including gold, silver, copper, lithium, coal, and potash ventures — prioritizes ventures critical to reducing U.S. reliance on foreign minerals and advancing national energy and economic security goals.

The Permitting Council identified high-value projects as “transparency projects” on the FAST-41 Federal Permitting Dashboard created under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act. Notable ventures include:

  • Stibnite Gold Project (Idaho): A proposed open-pit gold mine in central Idaho, aiming to mine gold, silver, and antimony.
Continue reading
Published on:

by and

Following President Trump’s March 20, 2025, Executive Order (“EO”) 14157, “Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production” (discussed in our blogpost here), and recent recognition of valid existing rights to continue mining for gold and rare earth elements at the Colosseum Mine (see our blogpost here blog), the administration has now taken decisive steps to advance one of the nation’s most significant mining projects: the Resolution Copper Mine in Arizona. On April 17, 2025, the U.S. Forest Service announced its intent to issue a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) and Draft Record of Decision (Draft ROD) within 60 days for the contested land exchange critical for the project. This move underscores the administration’s commitment to leveraging federal authority to fast-track domestic mineral production, even as legal and tribal challenges loom.

The Resolution Copper project, a joint venture between Rio Tinto and BHP, aims to develop the largest copper mine in the U.S., estimated to yield 40 billion pounds of copper over its lifetime. The mine hinges on a land exchange transferring 2,422 acres of Tonto National Forest land (Oak Flat, or Chí’chil Biłdagoteel to the Apache) to Resolution Copper in exchange for private parcels. Copper, recently added to the critical minerals list under EO 14157, is essential for renewable energy infrastructure, defense systems, and consumer electronics.

The Forest Service’s notice follows years of litigation and delayed consultations under prior administrations. The project is involved in pre-existing tensions with the San Carlos Apache Tribe and environmental groups. The Supreme Court is currently considering a petition filed by Apache Stronghold, a tribal advocacy group, to halt the land transfer (Apache Stronghold v. United States, No. 24-291). The petition argues that the project violates tribal religious rights and federal preservation laws.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

This week, the U.S. Department of the Interior (“DOI”) publicly confirmed the ongoing rights of Colosseum Rare Metals, Inc. (“CRM”) to continue mining operations at the Colosseum Mine, located within the Mojave National Preserve (“MOJA”) in San Bernardino County, California.  The Department’s communication reaffirms that CRM holds “valid existing rights” pursuant to the California Desert Protection Act (“CDPA”) to conduct mine operations under its existing plan of operations, approved by the Bureau of Land Management prior to enactment of the CDPA.  These rights include the right to explore for and extract rare earth elements in addition to gold.  [See DOI News Release and X announcement here]

DOI’s recognition of Colosseum’s mining rights furthers the goals of President Donald J. Trump’s Jan. 20, 2025, Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy” promoting domestic energy and resource independence, and March 20, 2025 Executive Order (“EO”) 14157, “Immediate Measures to Increase American Mineral Production,” spotlighting and bolstering domestic mining.  [See prior JMBM Blog on EO 14157 here]  In its recent news release, DOI underscored the importance of supporting domestic mining: “The resumption of mining at Colosseum Mine, America’s second rare earth elements mine, supports efforts to bolster America’s capacity to produce the critical materials needed to manufacture the technologies to power our future. For too long, the United States has depended on foreign adversaries like China for rare earth elements for technologies that are vital to our national security. By recognizing the mine’s continued right to extract and explore rare earth elements, Interior continues to support industries that boost the nation’s economy and protect national security.”

DOI proving EO Policies are more than just words

Continue reading
Published on:

by and

On the heels of President Trump’s January 20, 2025, Executive Order “Unleashing American Energy” promoting domestic energy and resource independence, he is promoting United States natural resources with Executive Order (“EO”) 14157, “Immediate Measure to Increase American Mineral Production,” issued March 20 to spotlight and bolster domestic mining. The President’s latest effort to prioritize mining, and in particular critical minerals, should come as no surprise. In a January 2025 speech, President Donald Trump framed his administration’s vision for domestic mineral production, particularly rare earth minerals, which are currently dominated by Chinese production: “We’re going to environmentally free up our rare earth minerals… We have some of the best rare earth anywhere in the world, but we’re not allowed to use it because the environmentalists got there first. They use the environment to stop progress, and we’re not going to let that happen.” [EO 14157 can be found here.]

Consistent with this vision, the March 20 EO seeks to accelerate domestic mining projects, reduce reliance on foreign supply chains, and streamline regulatory processes, including by expanding the scope of critical minerals to include gold, copper, uranium, and potash, while addressing critical bottlenecks in mine waste management. The order also permits the National Energy Dominance Council (“NEDC”), established by the President’s February 2025 Executive Order “Establishing the Energy Dominance Council“, to add other minerals to be within the scope of the order.

The EO focuses on three core mechanisms to boost domestic mineral production: (1) expedited permitting, (2) federal land leasing, and (3) funding and financing. The EO also notably addresses the uncertainty surrounding mining waste management under the Mining Act of 1872, particularly after the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish & Wildlife Serv., 33 F.4th 1202 (9th Cir. 2022) (“Rosemont Decision”). Some key points under the EO, and potential implications, include the following:

Continue reading
Published on:

by and

President Donald Trump has nominated Kathleen M. Sgamma, a 20-year advocate of the oil and gas industry, as the Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). BLM, an agency within the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI), is responsible for administering 245 million acres of federal public land and nearly 700 million acres of federal and state subsurface mineral estates. Sgamma notably was a member of the Royalty Policy Committee during Trump’s first term which advised the administration to streamline the permitting and review process for drilling on public lands and lower royalty rates on drillers and miners. Her nomination was announced on the Congressional Record Vol. 171, No. 28 on February 11, 2025.

Sgamma currently heads Western Energy Alliance, an oil and gas trade group representing 300 oil and natural gas companies, known for challenging regulatory restrictions on the oil and gas industry. Several past lawsuits brought by Western Energy Alliance against DOI, likely reflective of Sgamma’s policy stance, have sought to limit DOI leasing rules that raised royalty rates, challenge pauses on oil and gas leasing, and compel BLM to hold quarterly lease sales for federal minerals.

Sgamma recently showed enthusiastic support for the President’s “Unleashing American Energy” executive order, that called for unleashing “America’s affordable and reliable energy,” including oil and gas and domestic mining. Sgamma also worked on the energy section of the 900-page Project 2025 “Mandate for Leadership” plan, specifically on the chapter “Restoring American Energy Dominance,” which called for rolling back Biden regulations and restoring oil, gas and mining leases in Alaska, Wyoming and Montana where leases had been suspended.

Continue reading
Published on:

by

By Kerry Shapiro

On January 20, 2025, President Donald J. Trump issued the “Unleashing American Energy” Executive Order to, among other things, establish the United States as a “leading producer and processor of non-fuel minerals.” (“Executive Order”) The Executive Order emphasizes key energy policies, including the removal of EV-mandates and other actions to push forward the development of domestic energy. The Executive Order goes on to set forth several important policy directives focusing on mineral development, especially critical minerals. Broadly speaking, the Executive Order seeks to (1) promote domestic development of mineral resources; (2) cut significant red-tape by removing regulations and encouraging streamlined permitting, and (3) reevaluate historic withdrawals of public land for mineral and resource development. The following are among the litany of actions aimed at “unleashing” American energy and natural resources:

  • Comprehensive agency review of existing regulations that impose an “undue burden” on the development and production of domestic energy and mineral resources, and development of “action plans” to address same within 30 days of this Executive Order;
  • Eliminate all permitting delays, where possible, by utilizing tools such as “general permitting” or “permit by rule,” as well as “emergency authorities,” for projects deemed “essential for the Nation’s economy or national security;”
  • Prepare recommendations for legislative permitting reform, to be presented to Congress;
  • Reassessment of public land withdrawals;
  • Commence updated surveying and mapping for critical mineral resources;
  • Review and revise the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) and its implementing regulations, to facilitate compliance with the Executive Order and “prioritize efficiency and certainty over any other objectives, including those of activist groups” and avoid “delays and ambiguity” in federal permitting;
  • Limit environmental review to only “legislated requirements for environmental considerations,” and prohibit the use of “arbitrary or ideologically motivated” methodologies;
  • Immediate revocation and/or revision of numerous executive orders and regulations from the prior administration.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

By Kerry Shapiro

On May 25, 2023, the United States Supreme Court issued its ruling in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, narrowing the scope of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) regulatory authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The court held that the EPA’s authority under the CWA extends only to wetlands and permanent bodies of water with a “continuous surface connection” to “traditional interstate navigable waters.”

Sackett addressed the scope of EPA’s authority to regulate wetlands under the CWA, which generally prohibits discharging pollutants into “the waters of the United States.” 33 U.S.C. §1362(7). The Sacketts petitioned the Supreme Court for review of the Ninth Circuit’s decision upholding the scope of EPA’s authority. The Sacketts had purchased a lot upon which they planned to build a home and began backfilling this lot with dirt in preparation. However, the EPA sought to exercise jurisdiction, based on the assertion that the lot contained wetlands and backfilling it violated the CWA. At issue for the Court was whether these wetlands were, in fact, “waters of the United States” subject to regulation under the CWA.

The Supreme Court’s decision resolves ambiguity in the CWA over the meaning of “waters of the United States” within the context of the statute. Justice Alito, in his opinion, described the current confusion stemming from the ambiguity of the CWA’s language: “[W]hat does that phrase mean? Does the term encompass any backyard that is soggy enough for some minimum period of time? Does it reach ‘mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, [or] playa lakes?’ How about ditches, swimming pools, and puddles?”

This jurisdictional ambiguity has existed, in part, since the plurality split in the Court’s decision in Rapanos v. United States (2006) 547 U.S. 715, which articulated two tests for lower courts to use in determining whether the CWA applies: Justice Scalia’s bright-line rule, covering only wetlands next to “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water”; and Justice Kennedy’s broader interpretation, protecting wetlands that were part of a “significant nexus” with a navigable body of water. Continue reading

Published on:

by

By Kerry Shapiro

On March 9, 2023, the US District Court for the Eastern District of California issued its ruling in Friends of the Inyo, et al., v. U.S. Forest Service, et al., in favor of the Forest Service and JMBM client KORE Mining Limited, in a challenge under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”) against the Forest Service’s approval of KORE’s small-scale, mineral exploration plan, brought by multiple environmental groups, including Friends of the Inyo and Center for Biological Diversity.

The case concerned a challenge to the Forest Service’s approval of KORE’s limited exploration project on mining claims located in the Inyo National Forest. KORE originally filed a plan of operations in the summer of 2020, proposing a small-scale mineral exploration project, comprising less than 1 acre of disturbance across twelve drill pads, and construction of a third of a mile of temporary access roads. The exploration project would be completed in under a year.

Continue reading

Published on:

by

By Kerry Shapiro

The last month has seen a flurry of activity related to the California and Federal Endangered Species Acts, including:

  1. The California Supreme Court’s denial of review in the Almond Alliance of California v. California Fish and Game Commission litigation
  2. Governor Gavin Newsom’s appointment of a fifth member of the California Fish and Game Commission
  3. That Commission’s October 9, 2022 hearing, where consideration of the petition to list the western Joshua tree (WJT) as a threatened species was continued for a second time
  4. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposed listing of the Bay-Delta longfin smelt on October 7

First, on September 21, 2022, the California Supreme Court denied a petition to review a ruling by the 3rd District Court of Appeal in Almond Alliance of California v. Fish & Game Com., (2022) 79 Cal.App.5th 337. This denial lets stand the decision by the Court of Appeal, allowing the listing of four bumble bee species under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). In that decision, issued in May of this year, the Court of Appeal reversed the decision of the trial court, reasoning that the Fish and Game Commission could list insects because the California legislature – despite evidence accepted by the trial court that the legislative committees that wrote CESA’s language explicitly believe insects were ineligible for listing – found that “the term of art employed by the Legislature in the definition of fish is not … limited” to aquatic species. Continue reading

Published on:

by

By Kerry Shapiro

After more than a year of scientific study on the status of the western Joshua tree (“WJT”), the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (“CDFW”) has just completed its status review (“Status Review”) of the WJT and determined that the best available science on the species does not warrant listing it as threatened under the California Endangered Species Act (“CESA”). CDFW’s conclusion mirrors the conclusion independently made in a Population Study prepared on behalf of JMBM client California Construction and Industrial Materials Association (“CalCIMA”) and also submitted to CDFW and the California Fish and Game Commission (“Commission”) for consideration in the Commission’s final determination on whether or not to list the species. CalCIMA’s Population Study was submitted pursuant to Title 14, section 670.1(h) of the California Code of Regulations on April 5, 2022, and therefore must be considered by the Commission in making a final listing determination.

In making its recommendation to not list the WJT, CDFW found, based on “the best scientific information available to the Department” that the species “is not in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range,” and that “special protection and management efforts required by CESA” were not required for the species. Continue reading