H.R. 9184 explained  ·  119th Congress  ·  Pending in Congress

Local Data for Better Conservation Act

Create a free account or sign in to follow H.R. 9184 and get alerts. Policy area: Environmental Protection Create a free account or sign in to follow the Environmental Protection policy area and get alerts. ▲ 134 days since action Sponsor: Lauren Boebert, CO-04, R → Congress.gov

Cosponsors: 6 (0 D, 6 R) · per Congress.gov, 2026-10-08

Introduced: 2026-06-08

Latest action (2026-06-08): Referred to the House Committee on Natural Resources.

What H.R. 9184 does, in plain terms

The Congressional Research Service has not published a summary of H.R. 9184 yet. Its official title: “Local Data for Better Conservation Act”.

Constitution Index

“VFA Constitution grade”

Not graded yet

H.R. 9184 has not been graded yet. New measures with an official summary are graded daily under the published rubric.

The Framers

“Founders’ Verdict”

CONDITIONAL

Confidence 0.90

Archived SI output (machine-generated)

No editorial review recorded. This historical SI verdict was machine-generated by software and predates the review desk; check it against the official bill text.

Synthesis

The constitutionality of the amendment depends on whether it respects the limits of federal power under the Commerce Clause, the Necessary and Proper Clause, and the Tenth Amendment. The federal government may regulate species that have a substantial connection to interstate commerce, inhabit federal lands, or implicate valid treaties, but must not extend to purely intrastate species with no commercial nexus or commandeer state resources. The amendment must be narrowly tailored to avoid encroaching on state police powers and property rights.

Hamilton CONDITIONAL

The proposed amendment to the Endangered Species Act must be evaluated under the Commerce Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3) and the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8, Clause 18). The federal government may regulate activities that substantially affect interstate commerce, including the protection of species that have commercial value or whose conservation impacts commerce. However, if the amendment seeks to restrict or expand federal authority beyond those limits—for instance, by regulating purely intrastate species with no commercial nexus—it would exceed constitutional …

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 Tenth Amendment Federalist No. 33
Jefferson CONDITIONAL

The proposed bill amends the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to alter the listing process for threatened and endangered species. Under the Tenth Amendment, powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. The federal government's authority over species that are purely intrastate and do not affect interstate commerce or federal lands is suspect. Furthermore, the Ninth Amendment reminds us that the enumeration of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or retain others retained by th…

Amendment X Amendment IX
Madison CONDITIONAL

The proposed amendment implicates the balance of power between the federal government and the states regarding the regulation of species, which touches upon property rights and police powers. The original Endangered Species Act relies on the Commerce Clause and the Treaty Power. If the bill expands federal authority beyond the limits of enumerated powers—for example, by regulating purely intrastate species with no interstate commerce nexus or by commandeering state resources—it would exceed constitutional bounds. However, if the amendment merely refines the listing criteria within the existing…

Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 Tenth Amendment Federalist No. 39 Federalist No. 45
Marshall CONDITIONAL

The proposed amendment to the Endangered Species Act of 1973 must be examined under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause. The original Act, as a regulation of interstate commerce and federal property, falls within Congress's enumerated powers under Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, as interpreted in Gibbons v. Ogden (1824), which held that Congress may regulate all commerce that concerns more states than one. However, any amendment that would restrict the listing of species solely to those with a direct commercial nexus may exceed this power, as the protection of species often…

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 (Commerce Clause) McCulloch v. Maryland (1819)
Report an error in this Founders' Verdict
No account needed. Or email hello@valuesforamerica.com. How reports are handled.

What should pass

“VFA SI Solution”

No solution yet

A sourced SI draft appears here once it passes automated checks (Constitution citation, source verification, independent SI critic). How publication works.

Share card

1200×675 PNG for X, Threads, LinkedIn and messages. Free to share with a link back to this page.

For journalists and bloggers

“Embed this grade”

Free to use with the link back. The badge and card update when the grade changes. Embed terms →

VFA Constitution grade for H.R. 9184

← Back to the Republic