Natural Resources and Mining Law Blog
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:
Expedited Permitting – EO Section 3
The EO mandates that federal agencies prioritize certain mining projects (“Priority Projects”) for approval within 10–30 days, focusing on multi-purpose and high-value commodities like gold (which recently surpassed $3,000/oz in March 2025), copper, uranium, and potash. Under the EO, federal agencies must identify and prioritize mining projects for immediate approval, focusing on those with high economic or strategic value. Notably, within 10 days of the EO, permitting agencies must identify a list of all mineral production projects for which a plan of operations, a permit application, or other application for approval has been submitted. This in turn will trigger a list of “Priority Projects” that can be immediately approved. Further, within 30 days of the EO, high-priority initiatives will be fast-tracked through the FAST-41 Permitting Dashboard. This dashboard, created under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, mandates interagency coordination to compress environmental reviews and litigation timelines.
Federal Land Leasing – EO Section 5
Within 10 days of the EO, the Secretary of Interior must identify federal lands “known to hold mineral deposits and reserves” and amend land use plans to prioritize mining over other activities, such as recreation or conservation, under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). Within 30 days, the Departments of Interior, Agriculture, Energy, and Defense are directed to catalog federal lands that may be suitable for mineral production enterprises and enter into extended use leases or other land use agreements. While the President’s prioritization of mining on federal lands is clear, it may still be subject to tension based on traditional standards of multiple use management, including FLPMA’s mandate to prevent “unnecessary or undue degradation.”
Funding and Financing – EO Section 6
Importantly, the EO mobilizes Cold War-era tools like the Defense Production Act (DPA) to fund projects through loans, grants, and offtake agreements. The DPA’s Title III authority, traditionally reserved for wartime production, is now delegated to the Secretary of Defense and the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) to “create, maintain, protect, expand, or restore domestic mineral production.” Additionally, the Export-Import Bank (EXIM) will expand its Supply Chain Resiliency Initiative to secure global mineral feedstock for U.S. processors. The EO also directs the Small Business Administration (SBA) to propose legislation enhancing public-private partnerships for small mining firms, potentially unlocking capital for junior miners and exploration ventures to prospect and explore promising deposits.
Waste Management – EO Section 4
Section 4 of the EO directs the National Energy Dominance Council (NEDC) to submit recommendations to Congress within 30 days to clarify the Mining Act of 1872’s treatment of waste rock, tailings, and mine waste disposal. This provision appears to respond to uncertainty over how to manage waste operations on federal lands particularly after the 2022 Rosemont Decision, wherein the Ninth Circuit Court blocked the use of federal lands for waste rock and tailings storage unless operators could prove that the mining claims were “valid” (i.e., contained valuable minerals).
Prior to the Rosemont Decision, federal agencies such as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) approved waste disposal on claims without verifying minerals, assuming this ancillary mining use of federal land was valid. However, under the Rosemont Decision and subsequent agency interpretations (such as Solicitor’s Opinion M-37077, “Use of Mining Claims for Mine Waste Deposition, and Rescission of M-37012 and M-37057,” May 16, 2023), operators must now provide substantial geological evidence such as core drilling and assay reports, geologic mapping and surveys, economic feasibility analysis, historic production data to validate all of their claims prior to getting a plan of operations approved by the federal land management agency. Given the significant resource and time burdens associated with undertaking validity determinations by federal agencies, the Rosemont Decision forced mining companies to rely on limited-acreage “mill sites” (non-mineral land, often located further from the immediate extraction sites) for waste disposal, creating logistical and financial hurdles for large-scale projects.
Depending on how the EO is implemented, operators may be allowed to use mining claims for mining waste if they demonstrate minimal environmental impact, bypassing the Rosemont Decision’s restrictions. However, the perception of loosening mine waste rules could set the stage for potential disagreements between environmental groups and the administration, which will counter that reforms are essential to “free up” resources, as President Trump emphasized in his January speech.
Conclusion
President Trump’s March 2025 EO furthers the administration’s agenda to position the U.S. as a global leader in mineral production by streamlining perceived regulatory barriers, prioritizing federal land use, and mobilizing Cold War-era funding tools. By fast-tracking permits for critical mineral production including gold, copper, and uranium projects, expanding federal leasing, and tackling waste management ambiguities, the administration aims to reduce reliance on foreign mineral producers, like China, while revitalizing domestic industry. While this mandate is clear, the extent of the order’s success ultimately may hinge on balancing efficiency with compliance, if NGOs seek to challenge some of these efforts to streamline reviews. On balance, however, the EO offers tremendous opportunity for mining companies to access permits, land, and financing.
JMBM’s Natural Resources and Mining Group is closely monitoring these developments, including pending reforms to the Mining Act and updates to the critical minerals list.
Kerry Shapiro
Kerry Shapiro chairs the Natural Resources & Mining Practice Group at Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. He has represented the mining, building materials, and other resource industries on mineral extraction and land development projects for more than 25 years. Kerry also serves as General Counsel to the California Construction and Industrial Materials Association (CalCIMA). Contact Kerry at KShapiro@jmbm.com.
Ha Chung
Ha Chung is an environmental and land use lawyer at Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP. He advises clients on land use, development, water resources, and environmental regulatory compliance matters. Contact Ha at HChung@jmbm.com.
JMBM’s Natural Resources & Mining Law Group
Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP has one of California’s leading natural resources and mining law practice groups. The group is comprised of lawyers with over 25 years of practice in law firms, government, and consulting, and provides companies and trade associations with unparalleled counseling, compliance, and litigation services in nearly every area of federal and California natural resources and mining law.