FEAT Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Lee, Mike [R-UT]
- Committees
- Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 16, 2026
Bottom line
The FEAT Act provides a judicial bypass for certain Department of the Interior administrative disputes, allowing parties to shift review from agency tribunals to federal courts with a fresh examination of the facts and law.
What it actually does
This bill grants parties involved in specific administrative proceedings at the Department of the Interior the right to remove their cases to a U.S. district court for de novo review. It applies to proceedings adjudicated in the Departmental Cases Hearings Division or the Interior Board of Land Appeals, where a party initiated the action seeking Department approval or seeks relief from a sanction or civil penalty imposed by the Department.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill enhances due process and fairness for individuals and entities dealing with the Department of the Interior by allowing them to bypass potentially slow or biased administrative processes and receive a fresh, independent review in federal court. They believe it will expedite resolutions and provide a more impartial forum for disputes, particularly for those seeking permits or relief from penalties.
Opponents contend
Opponents might contend that this bill undermines the expertise and efficiency of administrative agencies, potentially overwhelming federal courts with cases that are better handled by specialized administrative law judges. They may argue it could lead to forum shopping, create delays as cases shift between administrative and judicial systems, and potentially favor regulated entities by allowing them to avoid agency expertise and precedent.
The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core provisions quickly.
Section 2(b)
Right of Removal to Federal District Court
This provision allows a party involved in specific Department of the Interior administrative proceedings to transfer their case from the agency's internal hearings division or appeals board directly to a U.S. district court. This removal must occur within 60 days of the administrative action being initiated. Eligible parties are those seeking Department approval for required conduct or those seeking relief from Department-imposed sanctions or civil penalties.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision empowers regulated entities and individuals by giving them a choice of forum, ensuring that disputes are not solely resolved within the agency that initiated the action or imposed the penalty. They believe de novo review in federal court offers a higher standard of judicial scrutiny and impartiality.
Critics contend
Critics may argue that this provision bypasses the specialized expertise of administrative tribunals, which are designed to handle complex regulatory matters efficiently. They might contend that federal courts are not equipped to handle the volume or technical nature of these cases, potentially leading to inconsistent rulings or prolonged litigation.
Tradeoffs
The bill balances the desire for judicial independence and de novo review for regulated parties against the administrative efficiency and specialized expertise of agency tribunals. It trades the potential for faster, specialized administrative resolution for a potentially more thorough, but possibly slower and less specialized, judicial review.
Section 2(c)
De Novo Review Standard
This subsection specifies that any administrative action removed to a U.S. district court under this Act will be reviewed "de novo." This means the federal court will examine the case as if it were entirely new, without deference to the administrative agency's prior findings of fact or conclusions of law. The court will make its own independent determinations.