PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Gosar, Paul A. [R-AZ-9] · 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: Oct 15, 2026. 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.10669 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.10669 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.10669 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.10669 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 · 2026-10-01 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 LANDs Act would require express congressional approval for federal agency land withdrawals covering more than 5,000 acres, with a temporary national-security exception. Withdrawals include restrictions on specified land uses and transfers of control between agencies. The bill would also narrow what national monuments can protect and restrict their size when close to another monument, affecting federal land managers and people who own or use affected property.
This Act may be cited as the Legislative Approval for National Designations Act or LANDs Act.
a covered land withdrawal may only be carried out with the express authorization of Congress.
The term covered land withdrawal means a Federal land withdrawal carried out by a Federal agency that would result in a withdrawal of more than 5,000 acres in aggregate.
made pursuant to temporary public land order
necessary for national security purposes, as determined by the President.
withholding an area of Federal land from settlement, sale, location, or entry, under some or all of the general land laws
transferring jurisdiction over an area of Federal land
by striking historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest and inserting object or objects of antiquity
land may not be designated under this section in a configuration that would create a national monument— (1) that is more than 640 acres; and (2) the exterior boundary of which is less than 50 miles from the closest exterior boundary of another national monument designated under this section.
without the express written consent of the owners of that non-federally owned property.
Section 2 would require express congressional authorization for a federal agency withdrawal totaling more than 5,000 acres. Subject to its stated exception, this requirement would override conflicting law.
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, except as provided in subsection (b), a covered land withdrawal may only be carried out with the express authorization of Congress.
The term covered land withdrawal means a Federal land withdrawal carried out by a Federal agency that would result in a withdrawal of more than 5,000 acres in aggregate.
The approval requirement would not apply if the President determines the withdrawal is necessary for national security and it uses a temporary public land order that expires within five years of issuance and has not been extended beyond that period. Both conditions would have to be met.
The restriction with respect to a covered land withdrawal under subsection (a) shall not apply if the withdrawal is— (1) made pursuant to temporary public land order, the expiration of which— (A) is 5 years or less after the date on which the land order was issued; and (B) has not been extended beyond the 5-year period after the date on which the land order was issued; and (2) necessary for national security purposes, as determined by the President.
The bill's definition of withdrawal would cover withholding federal land from specified activities under public-land, mining, mineral-leasing, mineral-materials and geothermal-leasing laws. It would also cover reserving an area for a use described in that list.
The term withdrawal means— (A) withholding an area of Federal land from settlement, sale, location, or entry, under some or all of the general land laws, including— (i) entry, appropriation, or disposal under the public land laws; (ii) location, entry, or patent under the mining laws; and (iii) operation of the mineral leasing, mineral materials, or geothermal leasing laws; (B) reserving an area for a use described in subparagraph (A)
Withdrawal would also include transferring jurisdiction over federal land between federal agencies, except for property governed by the cited Federal Property and Administrative Services Act. It would include restrictions on areas under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act's mineral-leasing provisions.
(C) transferring jurisdiction over an area of Federal land, other than property governed by the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act (40 U.S.C. 472), from one Federal agency to another Federal agency; or (D) restricting an area from operations of the mineral leasing provisions of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1331 et seq.).
Section 3 would amend the national-monument statute by replacing its reference to historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest with the bill's defined term “object or objects of antiquity.”
Section 320301 of title 54, United States Code, is amended— (1) in subsection (a), by striking historic landmarks, historic and prehistoric structures, and other objects of historic or scientific interest and inserting object or objects of antiquity
Eligible objects would mean relics, artifacts, human remains, fossils other than fossil fuels, and certain buildings constructed before enactment. Natural geographic features, landscapes, ecosystems and values would be excluded, as would objects not made by humans except qualifying fossils and human remains.
The term object or objects of antiquity— (A) means— (i) relics; (ii) artifacts; (iii) human remains; (iv) fossils (other than fossil fuels); and (v) certain buildings constructed before the date of the enactment of the Legislative Approval for National Designations Act; and (B) does not include, among other things— (i) natural geographic features; (ii) objects not made by humans, except fossils (other than fossil fuels) or human remains; (iii) landscapes or ecosystems; or (iv) values.
The bill would replace the existing instruction to confine monument land to the smallest area compatible with protecting and managing the objects. The replacement would instead direct compliance with proposed subsections (f), (g), (h) and (i).
in subsection (b), by striking confined to the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected and inserting in accordance with the limitations outlined in subsections (f), (g), (h), and (i)
After enactment, proposed subsection (e) would prohibit a monument configuration that meets both conditions: it exceeds 640 acres, and its exterior boundary is less than 50 miles from the nearest exterior boundary of another monument designated under the same statute. This is not a universal 640-acre cap. The subsection refers to exceptions in (g) and (h), while (f) separately provides an emergency exception.
Except as provided by subsections (g) and (h), after the date of the enactment of the Legislative Approval for National Designations Act, land may not be designated under this section in a configuration that would create a national monument— (1) that is more than 640 acres; and (2) the exterior boundary of which is less than 50 miles from the closest exterior boundary of another national monument designated under this section.
Subsection (e) shall not apply to the designation under this section of a national monument of any acreage amount if designation is made to prevent imminent and irreparable harm to the object or objects of antiquity to be protected by the designation.
An emergency monument designation could cover any acreage without the size-and-distance restriction if made to prevent imminent and irreparable harm to eligible objects. Generalized, speculative or cumulative environmental conditions—including long-term ecological or climate changes—would not qualify unless an immediate threat to specific eligible objects is identified.
Subsection (e) shall not apply to the designation under this section of a national monument of any acreage amount if designation is made to prevent imminent and irreparable harm to the object or objects of antiquity to be protected by the designation.
The term imminent and irreparable harm does not include generalized, speculative, or cumulative environmental conditions, including long-term ecological or climatological changes, unless an immediate threat is identified with respect to a specific object or objects of antiquity.
An emergency designation would end one calendar year after designation. The same land could receive that emergency designation only once and could not also be permanently designated as a monument under this statutory section.
A national monument designation under this subsection shall terminate on the date that is one calendar year after the date of the designation.
Land designated as a national monument under this subsection— (A) may only be so designated one time; and (B) may not also be permanently designated as a national monument under this section.
Land under an emergency designation would remain subject to valid existing rights and to uses allowed the day before designation under an applicable land, resource or forest management plan.
Land designated as a national monument under this subsection shall remain subject to— (A) valid existing rights; and (B) uses allowed on the day before such designation under an applicable land management plan, resource management plan, or forest plan.
After enactment, a monument's exterior boundaries could not encompass property outside federal ownership without the owners' express written consent.
After the date of the enactment of the Legislative Approval for National Designations Act, land may not be designated as a national monument under this section in a configuration that would place non-federally owned property within the exterior boundaries of the national monument without the express written consent of the owners of that non-federally owned property.
A monument designation would not itself increase the federal funding authorized for any fiscal year. This addresses authorization—the amount permitted to be provided through appropriations—rather than providing money.
No designation under this section shall be construed to increase the amount of Federal funds that are authorized to be appropriated for any fiscal year.
A monument designation could not reserve water rights, either explicitly or implicitly. Water rights for a designation could be acquired only under the laws of the state where those rights are based.
Water rights associated with a designation under this section— (1) may not be reserved expressly or by implication by a designation under this section; and (2) may be acquired for a designation under this section only in accordance with the laws of the State in which the water rights are based.
The monument provisions would treat presidential creation and expansion of monuments as designations, regardless of whether the action is called a declaration, proclamation, establishment, extension or a similar term.
The terms designate and designation shall be construed to include declare and declaration, proclaim and proclamation, establish and establishment, extend and extension, and similar terms used in Federal statutes, regulations, or executive documents to refer to the creation or expansion of a national monument by the President.
For the amended national-monument section, the bill would exclude submerged land and water from the meaning of land.
For the purposes of this section:
The term land shall not include submerged land or water.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated October 15, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Natural Resources on October 1, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-15T21:09:37Z. 2026-10-01: Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources. 2026-10-01: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-10-01. 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 change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish the absence of riders 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 is limited to that version; formal earmark status in accompanying materials cannot be established from this bundle.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit was identified in the complete supplied introduced text under the stated criteria. Generally applicable rights and policy exceptions do not alone establish such a benefit. This conclusion is limited to the supplied version, not other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 15, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI