H.R. 2252 (119th)Bill Overview

North Dakota Trust Lands Completion Act of 2025

Public Lands and Natural Resources|Public Lands and Natural Resources
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Mar 21, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

This bill authorizes the State of North Dakota to relinquish State land-grant parcels to the Federal government in exchange for selection of unappropriated Bureau of Land Management land of substantially equivalent value. If relinquished parcels lie within an Indian reservation, the Secretary of the Interior, at an affected Tribe's request, will take the portion into trust for that Tribe.

Why people may split

Progressives highlight tribal land restoration and treaty protections

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly scoped substantive policy change establishing a statutory mechanism for State in-lieu selections and conveyances of Federal land in North Dakota, with substantial procedural detail and integration with existing law.

This bill authorizes the State of North Dakota to relinquish State land-grant parcels to the Federal government in exchange for selection of unappropriated Bureau of Land Management land of substantially equivalent value.

If relinquished parcels lie within an Indian reservation, the Secretary of the Interior, at an affected Tribe's request, will take the portion into trust for that Tribe.

The bill specifies appraisal and equalization rules, hazardous materials inspections, continuation of existing grazing arrangements, consultation requirements with Tribes, and preserves ongoing litigation rights.

Passage60/100

Technocratic, limited fiscal impact, and built-in safeguards increase passability, but localized opposition and Senate procedure are key constraints.

CredibilityAligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly scoped substantive policy change establishing a statutory mechanism for State in-lieu selections and conveyances of Federal land in North Dakota, with substantial procedural detail and integration with existing law.

Contention65/100

Progressives highlight tribal land restoration and treaty protections

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Federal agencies · Permitting processFederal agencies

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Federal agenciesEnables restoration of reservation land into Federal trust on request, increasing tribal land base.
  • Federal agenciesAllows the State to obtain replacement federal parcels to manage as school and university trust lands.
  • Permitting processMaintains existing grazing leases and related economic continuity for permittees during lease terms.
Likely burdened
  • Federal agenciesMay convert federal public lands to State control, potentially reducing federal protections and public access.
  • Potential burdenValuation or appraisal disagreements could lead to undervaluation and net loss of public mineral or land value.
  • Federal agenciesConveyance of parcels with producing mineral leases could alter federal and state mineral revenue sharing.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Progressives highlight tribal land restoration and treaty protections
Progressive85%

Likely supportive because the bill facilitates returning state-granted lands within reservations into federal trust for Tribes, advancing tribal land restoration.

The appraisal and consultation requirements, hazardous materials reviews, and explicit treaty-right protections are positive, though details on valuation and implementation warrant scrutiny.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Generally favorable as a pragmatic mechanism to settle title issues and reallocate lands, with formal appraisal, equalization, and consultation procedures.

Concerns center on implementation details, transparency, and fiscal and environmental safeguards.

Leans supportive
Conservative30%

Skeptical because the bill enables transfer of state-granted lands and potential federal trust acquisitions, reducing state control and possibly diverting mineral revenue.

The compensatory appraisal framework mitigates some concerns, but expansion of federal authority is a key worry.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood60/100

Technocratic, limited fiscal impact, and built-in safeguards increase passability, but localized opposition and Senate procedure are key constraints.

Scope and complexity
24%
Scopenarrow
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • Whether the North Dakota Board and tribes officially support specific exchanges
  • Absent formal cost estimate or federal budget scoring
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Progressives highlight tribal land restoration and treaty protections

Technocratic, limited fiscal impact, and built-in safeguards increase passability, but localized opposition and Senate procedure are key co…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a clearly scoped substantive policy change establishing a statutory mechanism for State in-lieu selections and conveyances of Federal land in North Dakota, with su…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis