PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 17, 2018
Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe Reservation Restoration Act
This bill directs the Department of Agriculture to transfer to the administrative jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior all right, title, and interest of the United States in and to approximately 11,760 acres of identified federal land in the Chippewa National Forest in Cass County, Minnesota. Immediately upon transfer, the federal land shall be held in trust for the benefit of the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe and considered as a part of its reservation.
The federal land shall not become eligible or be used for gaming activities under the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act.
People & committees
Rep. Nolan, Richard M. [D-MN-8] · D–MN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Indian, Insular and Alaska Native Affairs.
Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 10, 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.5529 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.5529 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.5529 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.5529 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.