PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 3, 2025
Less Imprecision in Species Treatment Act of 2025 or the LIST Act of 2025
This bill modifies the process for removing a species from the endangered or threatened species lists and makes related requirements.
A species must be removed from the endangered or threatened species lists if the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service produces or receives substantial scientific or commercial information demonstrating that the species is recovered or that recovery goals set for the species have been met.
The publication and notice of a proposed regulation to remove a species from the lists must consist solely of a notice of the removal.
The bill establishes a process for removing species from the lists if they were erroneously or wrongfully listed. The bill prohibits a person from submitting a petition to list a species as a threatened or endangered species for 10 years if the person knowingly submitted a petition with information that was inaccurate beyond scientifically reasonable margins of error, fraudulent, or misrepresentative.
People & committees
Rep. Biggs, Andy [R-AZ-5] · R–AZ
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Feb 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.106 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.106 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.106 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.106 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-01-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed LIST Act of 2025 would require federal officials to begin removing species from Endangered Species Act lists when specified recovery conditions are met. It would also require removal in certain cases involving recovery evidence or faulty listing information, changing how officials decide whether species should remain listed for protection.
This Act may be cited as the Less Imprecision in Species Treatment Act of 2025 or the LIST Act of 2025.
The Secretary shall initiate the procedures in accordance with subsection (a)(1) to remove a species from a list published under subsection (c) if— (i) the goals of a recovery plan for the species developed under subsection (f) have been met; or (ii) the goals for recovery of the species have not been developed under subsection (f), and the Secretary determines that the species has recovered sufficiently to no longer require the protection of the Act.
the Secretary shall remove a species from any list published under subsection (c) if the Department of the Interior has produced or received substantial scientific or commercial information demonstrating that the species is recovered or that recovery goals set for the species under subsection (f) have been met.
remove from any list published under subsection (c) any species for which a positive finding is made under clause (i)
Section 2(a) would require the Secretary to start the removal process when a species meets its recovery-plan goals. If recovery goals have not been developed, the Secretary would have to start that process upon determining that the species has recovered enough to no longer need the Act's protection.
(9) (A) The Secretary shall initiate the procedures in accordance with subsection (a)(1) to remove a species from a list published under subsection (c) if— (i) the goals of a recovery plan for the species developed under subsection (f) have been met; or (ii) the goals for recovery of the species have not been developed under subsection (f), and the Secretary determines that the species has recovered sufficiently to no longer require the protection of the Act.
A separate provision would require removal when the Interior Department produces or receives substantial scientific or commercial information showing recovery or achievement of recovery goals. It would override the cited requirement that these determinations follow subsections (a) and (b) of existing law.
(B) Notwithstanding the requirement of subsection (c)(2) that each determination under subparagraph (B) of that subsection shall be made in accordance with the provisions of subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary shall remove a species from any list published under subsection (c) if the Department of the Interior has produced or received substantial scientific or commercial information demonstrating that the species is recovered or that recovery goals set for the species under subsection (f) have been met.
For species removed under the recovery provision's subparagraph (A), the publication and notice required by the cited existing-law provision would consist solely of a removal notice.
(C) In the case of a species removed under subparagraph (A) from a list published under subsection (c), the publication and notice under subsection (b)(5) shall consist solely of a notice of such removal.
Section 2(b) would create a review process for listings based on scientific or commercial information that was inaccurate beyond scientifically reasonable margins of error, fraudulent, or misrepresentative when available to or received or produced by the Interior Department.
(ii) Information referred to in clause (i) is any information demonstrating that the listing was determined on the basis of scientific or commercial information available to, or received or produced by, the Department under paragraphs (1) and (3) of subsection (b) that at the time the scientific or commercial information was available to or received or produced by the Department it was— (I) inaccurate beyond scientifically reasonable margins of error; (II) fraudulent; or (III) misrepresentative.
Within 90 days after the Interior Department receives or produces qualifying information, the Secretary would, to the maximum extent practicable, determine whether the listing was unlikely to have occurred without the faulty information.
(E) (i) Not later than 90 days after the date the Department of the Interior receives or produces under this subsection information described in clause (ii) regarding a species included in a list under subsection (c), the Secretary shall to the maximum extent practicable find whether the inclusion of such species in such list was less than likely to have occurred in the absence of the scientific or commercial information referred to in clause (ii).
A positive finding under that test would require removing the species and promptly publishing the finding and supporting information in the Federal Register. This requirement would override the cited requirement to follow existing subsections (a) and (b).
(iii) Notwithstanding the requirement under subsection (c)(2)(B) that each determination under subparagraph (B) shall be made in accordance with the provisions of subsections (a) and (b), the Secretary shall— (I) remove from any list published under subsection (c) any species for which a positive finding is made under clause (i); and (II) promptly publish in the Federal Register notice of such finding that includes such information as was received or produced by the Department under such clause.
Courts could review negative findings under the faulty-information test, but could not review positive findings. For removals resulting from positive findings, publication and notice under the cited existing-law provision would consist solely of a removal notice.
(iv) Any positive finding by the Secretary under clause (i) shall not be subject to judicial review. (v) Any negative finding by the Secretary under clause (i) shall be subject to judicial review. (vi) In the case of a species removed under clause (iii) from a list, the publication and notice under subsection (b)(5) shall consist solely of a notice of such removal.
If the Secretary found that a person knowingly submitted qualifying faulty information in a petition associated with a positive finding, that person would lose “interested person” status for the specified petition procedure for 10 years. The restriction would begin on the date of that knowledge finding and apply to petitions the person submitted after submitting the faulty information.
(vii) If the Secretary finds that a person submitted a petition that is the subject of a positive finding under clause (i) knowing that it contained scientific or commercial information described in clause (ii), then during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the finding under this clause the person shall not be considered an interested person for purposes of subparagraph (A) with respect to any petition submitted by the person after the date the person submitted such scientific or commercial information.
Section 3 would require each species-status determination during the five-year review to consider one of four listed alternatives. The first two concern recovery-plan criteria or, when objective, measurable criteria have not been established, the factors in the cited existing-law provisions for determining endangered or threatened status.
3. Expanded consideration during 5-year review
(3) Each determination under paragraph (2)(B) shall consider one of the following: (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B) of this paragraph, the criteria required under subsection (f)(1)(B) in the recovery plan for the species. (B) If the objective, measurable criteria under subsection (f)(1)(B)(ii) are not established, the factors for the determination that a species is an endangered species or a threatened species set forth in subsections (a)(1) and (b)(1).
The other five-year-review alternatives would be a finding that an endangered, threatened, or extinct classification was erroneous, or a determination based on statutory listing factors that the species is no longer endangered, threatened, or in danger of extinction.
(3) Each determination under paragraph (2)(B) shall consider one of the following:
(C) A finding of error in the determination that the species is an endangered species, a threatened species, or extinct. (D) A determination that the species is no longer an endangered species or threatened species or in danger of extinction, based on an analysis of the factors that are the basis for listing in subsections (a)(1) and (b)(1).
The supplied actions snapshot, updated February 18, 2025, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on January 3, 2025.
Source snapshot updated 2025-02-18T15:12:49Z. 2025-01-03: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2025-01-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-01-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy provision attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow beneficiary-specific exemption or preferential treatment was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Feb 18, 2025. How PlainBill uses AI