PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Mr. Stewart asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 622, a bill originally introduced by Representative Chaffetz, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 24, 2017
Local Enforcement for Local Lands Act
This bill declares that, by September 30, 2017, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) shall terminate the Forest Service Law Enforcement and Investigations unit and cease using Forest Service employees to perform law enforcement functions on federal lands.
Also by such date, the Department of the Interior shall terminate the Bureau of Land Management Office of Law Enforcement and cease using Interior employees to perform law enforcement functions on federal lands.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Interior shall make a grant to each state to permit the state to maintain law and order on federal land, protect individuals and property on federal lands, and enforce federal law.
Any state or local government receiving the grant or subgrant shall enter into an agreement with Interior or USDA, as appropriate, to address the maintenance of law and order and the protection of individuals and property on federal land.
In any such agreement, Interior or USDA must waive all civil claims against the state or local government and indemnify that government and save it harmless from all claims by third parties for property damage or personal injury that may arise out of law enforcement functions performed under the agreement.
A state or local law enforcement officer performing law enforcement functions pursuant to such an agreement shall not generally be deemed a federal employee with respect to hours of work, compensation rates, leave, unemployment compensation, and federal benefits, among other things.
People & committees
Rep. Chaffetz, Jason [R-UT-3] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
ASSUMING FIRST SPONSORSHIP - Mr. Stewart asked unanimous consent that he may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 622, a bill originally introduced by Representative Chaffetz, for the purpose of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII. Agreed to without objection.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Conservation and Forestry.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Federal Lands.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 11, 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.622 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.622 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.622 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.622 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.