New CLEAR Act Immediately Voids Forest Service's Law Enforcement Rules: What It Means for Federal Land Use

The newly introduced Community Law Enforcement Authority Restoration Act of 2025, or the CLEAR Act, is short, direct, and packs a punch. Section 2 of this bill doesn't propose a new policy; it simply eliminates an existing one. Specifically, it prohibits the U.S. Forest Service from administering, implementing, or enforcing a rule concerning “Law Enforcement; Criminal Prohibitions” that was published in the Federal Register on January 28, 2025 (89 Fed. Reg. 92808). The bill declares that this rule now has “no force or effect.” That’s policy-speak for: this rule is dead on arrival, effective immediately.

The Instant Repeal of Federal Land Rules

Think of the U.S. Forest Service as the landlord and security force for millions of acres of national forests and grasslands—the places where people hike, camp, fish, and where industries like logging and mining operate. Every landlord needs rules. This bill, by killing the specific rule cited in the Federal Register, instantly removes whatever standards, prohibitions, or enforcement guidelines the Forest Service had just put into place regarding criminal behavior on that land. We don't know the exact text of the 89 Fed. Reg. rule without looking it up, but the title suggests it dealt with how the Forest Service handles law enforcement and what actions are considered criminal on their property. By nullifying it, the CLEAR Act creates an immediate void.

Who Feels the Change and Why

For the average person planning a camping trip, this might seem like bureaucratic noise, but it matters for two main groups. First, the Forest Service personnel: they rely on these specific rules to define their authority and prosecute violations. If the repealed rule provided clarity on, say, illegal dumping or unauthorized vehicle use, those enforcement tools just disappeared. This could make their job harder and potentially lead to confusion about jurisdiction or applicable penalties. Second, the public that uses these lands: if the repealed rule established new protections—perhaps stricter limits on noise, pollution, or resource extraction—those protections are now gone. For environmental groups or people who rely on these lands for recreation, the removal of specific prohibitions could mean less oversight and potentially more damage or disruption.

What Happens When You Delete the Fine Print

This move is a legislative override of the administrative process. Normally, federal agencies like the Forest Service go through a lengthy process of drafting rules, taking public comments, and publishing the final version. The CLEAR Act uses a very short piece of legislation to wipe out that work instantly. While the benefit could be immediate relief for anyone negatively impacted by the now-voided rule—perhaps a business owner or land user found it overly restrictive—the immediate concern is the lack of replacement. When you delete a rule about criminal prohibitions, you risk creating a regulatory gap where certain activities that were previously restricted are now operating under less clear or less stringent guidelines. It’s like removing a section from the employee handbook without telling anyone what the new policy is, leaving everyone guessing about what’s allowed.