'Flagrantly in violation of federal law': Biden admin faces pressure to rescind environmental proposal blocking oil drilling

The Biden administration's Bureau of Land Management is facing calls to rescind a March proposal that would effectively block oil drilling and mining on public land, Fox News Digital reported.

The BLM's proposed new rule would allow environmental groups to lease land for conservation use, thereby temporarily preventing the area from being used for oil drilling or mining projects. The eco-organizations could then use the land to conduct restoration projects.

Under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act, the BLM is required to lease public land it manages for various uses, including oil drilling, mining, grazing, and recreational use. The new rule aims to add "conservation" to the BLM's "multiple-use" mandate, placing it "on equal footing" with the other land uses previously passed by Congress.

The BLM stated that its proposal aims to curb climate change and conserve the public lands' wildlife, landscapes, and natural resources.

After extending the proposal's public comment period, the agency received 170,000 comments, including firm opposition to the plan.

Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen told Fox News Digital that the BLM is attempting to "shove through another overarching, sweeping rule that's not supported by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act."

"They're trying to argue that conservation now somehow fits within the definition of uses under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act and trying to do it by rule," he explained.

Knudsen accused the BLM's proposal of being "just flagrantly in violation of federal law" and claimed the agency was "trying to do it on the sly" because the administration would be unsuccessful in getting a law passed through Congress.

Knudsen and other state attorneys general sent comment letters to the BLM arguing that the new rule violates FLPMA policy and would damage the energy industry.

"Uses are all defined in FLPMA. Nowhere in there does the term conservation — conservation is basically non-use," Knudsen added. "So what this would amount to is locking up swaths of federal land for 'conservation.' That's not an approved use under the law. If you want to do that, fine. Go to Congress, pass the bill, get the president to sign it. But they know they don't have the juice to do that."

Mining, farming, and oil organizations have also pushed back against the new proposal.

In a comment letter to the BLM, National Mining Association counsel Katie Mills wrote, "In our view, the proposal represents a fundamental shift in the way BLM currently manages federal lands under the Federal Land Policy and Management Act's (FLPMA) multiple use mandate."

In a separate letter to the BLM, American Exploration & Mining Association executive director Mark Compton accused the rule of being "illegal" and insisted it be "withdrawn immediately."

"While the Proposed Rule pays lip service to [FLPMA] as amended, it fundamentally violates FLPMA in multiple ways, including illegally adding 'conservation' as a 'use' when Congress did not include it in FLPMA's specific list of uses," Compton stated.

The Nevada Farm Bureau Federation, the South Dakota Cattlemen's Association, and the Independent Petroleum Association of New Mexico also demanded that BLM withdraw the proposal.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!