Endangered Species Act Overhaul: LIST Act of 2025 Speeds Up Delisting, Limits Judicial Review

The "Less Imprecision in Species Treatment Act of 2025" (LIST Act) aims to shake up the Endangered Species Act (ESA) by streamlining the process of removing species from the endangered list. The core idea? If a species hits its recovery goals, or if the Department of the Interior (DOI) has solid scientific data showing it's bounced back, the delisting process must begin. It also cracks down on what it sees as wrongly listed species due to bad info, and expands what gets looked at during the 5-year species reviews. The bill was introduced by Representative Andy Biggs.

Fast-Tracking Delisting

The LIST Act puts the delisting process on a fast track under several conditions. First, if a species meets the recovery goals outlined in its official recovery plan, the Secretary of the Interior is required to initiate delisting (SEC. 2). Even without a formal recovery plan, if the Secretary determines a species is sufficiently recovered, the delisting process begins. Finally, if the DOI possesses "substantial scientific or commercial information" indicating recovery, that also triggers delisting. It's important to note that the public notice for removing a species in these instances will be a notice of removal only.

For example, if a specific type of bird was listed as endangered due to habitat loss, and a recovery plan set a target population size, hitting that target would automatically trigger the delisting process. Or, say a new study provides strong evidence that a plant species is far more widespread and resilient than initially believed – that could be enough to start delisting, even without hitting formal recovery goals.

Wrongful Listing Crackdown

Here's where things get interesting. The LIST Act introduces a 90-day deadline for the Secretary of the Interior to determine if a species was wrongly listed due to "inaccurate, fraudulent, or misrepresented" information (SEC. 2). If the Secretary finds the listing was indeed wrongful, the species must be removed. The finding, and the information behind it, gets published in the Federal Register. Crucially, a positive finding of wrongful listing cannot be challenged in court, though a negative finding can be.

Think of it like this: if someone claimed a rare butterfly was only found in a single, soon-to-be-developed meadow, and that claim was later proven false (maybe the butterfly is thriving in several other locations), the species could be quickly delisted, and that decision couldn't be appealed. The bill also penalizes those who knowingly submit false data. They'll be banned from participating in future listing petitions for 10 years (SEC. 2).

Expanded 5-Year Reviews

The LIST Act also broadens what's considered during the mandatory 5-year reviews of listed species (SEC. 3). These reviews now must consider one of the following: the species' recovery plan criteria, the original factors used to list the species (if there's no recovery plan), any evidence of errors in the initial classification, or a determination that the species is no longer endangered or threatened based on the original listing factors. This could lead to more frequent re-evaluations and, potentially, more delistings.

Potential Challenges and Implications

While the LIST Act aims to improve the efficiency and accuracy of the ESA, it also raises some significant questions. The 90-day window for determining wrongful listing might be tight for a thorough scientific review. Could this lead to rushed decisions? The lack of judicial review for positive wrongful listing findings is also a concern. It essentially gives the Secretary of the Interior the final say, with no legal recourse for those who disagree. The phrase "substantial scientific or commercial information" is also open to interpretation, which could lead to disputes over what qualifies as sufficient evidence for delisting. Finally, while the 10-year ban for submitting false information is a deterrent, some might argue it's not strong enough.

Overall, the LIST Act represents a significant shift in how the Endangered Species Act could operate. It prioritizes quicker delisting and gives the Department of the Interior more power in these decisions, while potentially limiting legal challenges and accelerating the removal of species from the endangered list.