The U.S. House of Representatives has passed a resolution aimed at overturning a federal mineral withdrawal near Minnesota’s Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness, setting the stage for a renewed political and legal fight over one of the nation’s most contentious mining proposals.
The House approved Joint Resolution 140 by a narrow 214–208 vote, with one Democrat and one Republican breaking party lines. The resolution now heads to the Senate, where it would require only a simple majority to pass before being sent to President Donald Trump for consideration.
If enacted, the resolution would overturn Public Land Order 7917, a decision that withdrew more than 225,000 acres of federal land in the Rainy River Watershed from new mineral leasing and terminated existing federal leases held by Twin Metals Minnesota. The move would reopen the door for copper-nickel mining near the Boundary Waters, the most visited wilderness area in the United States.
A high-stakes vote for public lands and mining policy
The withdrawn lands lie several miles north of the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness and drain into a fragile watershed that environmental advocates say is uniquely vulnerable to mining pollution. Twin Metals has long sought to develop an underground copper-nickel mine in the region, arguing that domestic mineral production is critical for U.S. manufacturing, clean energy technologies, and national security.
Opponents, however, warn that sulfide-ore copper mining carries significant environmental risks, particularly in water-rich ecosystems like the Boundary Waters, where acid mine drainage could have irreversible consequences.
“This bill sacrifices America’s most visited Wilderness for the benefit of a Chilean company that sends its concentrates to China,” said Ingrid Lyons, executive director of Save the Boundary Waters, in a statement following the vote. “Those who voted in favor of HJR 140 voted to sell out American public lands to foreign interests.”
Lyons added that environmental groups now view the Senate as the final line of defense for protecting the Boundary Waters and preserving long-standing precedent governing public land withdrawals.
Congressional Review Act at the center of controversy
The resolution was introduced by Rep. Pete Stauber, a Republican who represents northeastern Minnesota and whose district includes communities near the Boundary Waters. Stauber used the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to challenge the Biden-era land withdrawal—an approach environmental advocates have criticized as unprecedented.
The CRA allows Congress to overturn certain federal actions with a simple majority vote, bypassing the Senate filibuster. While it is typically used to rescind agency regulations, critics argue that applying it to a public land order represents a dramatic expansion of congressional authority.
Lyons previously told Minnesota public radio outlet WTIP that using the CRA in this manner departs from decades of congressional practice and could weaken protections for public lands nationwide.
Stauber rejected those criticisms, framing the withdrawal as unlawful and harmful to working families in northern Minnesota.
“I’m thrilled the House has passed H.J. Res. 140 to repeal Biden’s illegal mining ban that directly threatened our way of life,” Stauber said in a press release. “Growing up in the Northland, I’ve seen firsthand how these radical policies kill jobs and hurt families.”
Foreign ownership and geopolitical concerns
Twin Metals Minnesota is a subsidiary of Antofagasta, a Chilean mining conglomerate. The company’s foreign ownership has become a focal point in the debate, particularly after Reuters reported that Antofagasta agreed to send its copper concentrates to Chinese smelters at no cost—an unusually low arrangement for the industry.
Under that agreement, refined copper would then be sold by Chinese firms on the global market, raising concerns among critics that the project would ultimately benefit foreign governments more than U.S. communities.
“The passage of this bill is a disappointing sign that elected officials sided with a foreign mining conglomerate instead of America’s outdoor community,” said Matthew Schultz, program manager for Sportsmen for the Boundary Waters. “This vote placed a foreign mining project above the hunting, fishing, paddling, and outdoor heritage of the United States.”
Support from mining and labor advocates
Mining supporters praised the House vote as a necessary step toward restoring access to critical mineral resources. The National Mining Association released a joint letter signed by nearly 150 organizations backing renewed mining access in Minnesota.
Advocates argue that copper and nickel are essential for electric vehicles, renewable energy infrastructure, and modern defense systems—and that domestic production reduces reliance on foreign supply chains.
“The Range has been overdue for an economic comeback,” said Ryan Sistad, executive director of Better in Our Backyard. “This resolution has real potential to help deliver it—while strengthening America’s national security at the same time.”
Supporters also contend that modern mining regulations can protect water quality while allowing responsible development to proceed.
“Science and process—not shifting politics—should guide mine permitting,” said Julie Lucas of MiningMinnesota. “Minnesotans can safeguard our environment while supplying the minerals essential to grid reliability, electric vehicles, and national security.”
Minnesota delegation divided
The House debate featured sharp divisions within Minnesota’s congressional delegation. Stauber spoke forcefully in favor of the resolution, emphasizing that he represents communities closest to the Boundary Waters.
“It won’t surprise you that the representative from that area supports this resolution,” Stauber said during floor debate.
Democratic Reps. Betty McCollum and Kelly Morrison opposed the measure, arguing that the Boundary Waters’ ecological value outweighs potential economic gains.
Local business owners also weighed in. Clare and Dan Shirley, owners of Sawbill Canoe Outfitters, criticized the vote as out of step with public sentiment in northern Minnesota.
“Today’s congressional vote highlights the extreme gap between Stauber and his constituents,” they said in a statement. “With our federal government more interested in giving handouts to foreign billionaires, it’s time for Minnesotans to stand up and protect these lands ourselves.”
What happens next
The proposed mine site includes both state and federal land, meaning approvals from both governments would be required for development to proceed. Even if the federal withdrawal is overturned, Minnesota lawmakers could still enact state-level protections.
However, with slim Democratic majorities in both chambers of the Minnesota Legislature, passing such legislation would be politically challenging.
The Senate now faces mounting pressure from both sides as it considers the resolution. Environmental groups warn that approving it would set a dangerous precedent for future public land protections, while mining advocates argue that failure to act would leave the United States dependent on foreign mineral supplies.
As the debate moves forward, the future of the Boundary Waters—and the balance between conservation and resource development—remains uncertain.
Emily Johnson is a critically acclaimed essayist and novelist known for her thought-provoking works centered on feminism, women’s rights, and modern relationships. Born and raised in Portland, Oregon, Emily grew up with a deep love of books, often spending her afternoons at her local library. She went on to study literature and gender studies at UCLA, where she became deeply involved in activism and began publishing essays in campus journals. Her debut essay collection, Voices Unbound, struck a chord with readers nationwide for its fearless exploration of gender dynamics, identity, and the challenges faced by women in contemporary society. Emily later transitioned into fiction, writing novels that balance compelling storytelling with social commentary. Her protagonists are often strong, multidimensional women navigating love, ambition, and the struggles of everyday life, making her a favorite among readers who crave authentic, relatable narratives. Critics praise her ability to merge personal intimacy with universal themes. Off the page, Emily is an advocate for women in publishing, leading workshops that encourage young female writers to embrace their voices. She lives in Seattle with her partner and two rescue cats, where she continues to write, teach, and inspire a new generation of storytellers.
