On January 20, President Trump issued an executive order titled “Unleashing Alaska’s Extraordinary Resource Potential” (the “Alaska EO”). The order reverses decisions by the Biden administration to limit energy resource development on Alaska State and federal lands, which the Alaska EO labels as “punitive” and an “assault on Alaska’s sovereignty.” The order also (i) significantly changes the policy of the Biden administration with respect to the ability of tribes to exercise sovereign authority over their lands; and (ii) makes further federal land available to Alaska Native Corporations to satisfy their remaining land selection rights under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (“ANCSA”).

Energy Development

The Alaska EO states it intends to “reverse the punitive restrictions implemented by the previous administration that specifically target resource development on both State and federal lands in Alaska.” To that end, the order redefines the “policy of the United States” to:

• • “fully avail itself of Alaska’s vast lands and resources for the benefit of the Nation and the American citizens who call Alaska home”;
  • “efficiently and effectively maximize the development and production of the natural resources located on both federal and State lands within Alaska”;
  • “expedite the permitting and leasing of energy and natural resource projects in Alaska”; and
  • “prioritize the development of Alaska’s liquified natural gas (LNG) potential, including the sale and transportation of Alaskan LNG to other regions of the United States and allied nations within the Pacific region.”

The Alaska EO contains expansive directives to federal agencies to implement these policies, including that:

• • “The Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, under the direction of the Secretary of the Army, shall immediately review, revise, or rescind any agency action that may in any way hinder, slow, or otherwise delay any critical project in the State of Alaska;” (emphasis original)
  • “The Secretary of Commerce, in coordination with the Secretary of the Interior, shall immediately review, revise or rescind any agency action that may in any way hinder, slow or otherwise delay any critical project in the State of Alaska;” (emphasis original)
  • “The Secretary of the Army, acting through the Assistant Secretary of the Army for Civil Works, shall render all assistance requested by the Governor of Alaska to facilitate the clearing and maintenance of transportation infrastructure, consistent with applicable law;”
  • Federal agencies will “identify and assess, in collaboration with the Secretary of Defense, the authorities and public and private resources necessary to immediately achieve the development and export of energy resources from Alaska—including but not limited to the long-term viability of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System and the associated federal right-of-way as an energy corridor of critical national importance—to advance the Nation’s domestic and regional energy dominance, and submit that assessment to the President”; and
  • “prioritize the development of Alaska’s LNG potential, including the permitting of all necessary pipeline and export infrastructure related to the Alaska LNG Project, giving due consideration to the economic and national security benefits associated with such development.”

While this approach will certainly be welcomed by the State of Alaska’s current administration and any companies that have an interest in the development of Alaska’s natural resources, the practical effect will not be known until the applicable federal agencies incorporate these policies into their regulatory and administrative actions, and inevitable legal challenges are resolved.

However, the Alaska EO did take specific, immediate action that will likely have a short-term effect on natural resource development in Alaska. Specifically, it:

• • rescinds several different actions by the Biden administration to restrict natural resource development in parts of Alaska, including in ANWR and oil and gas lease sales; and
  • rescinds several different Biden administration actions regarding the National Petroleum Reserve

Alaska Native Corporation Land Selections

Alaska Native Corporations were granted the ability to select over 45 million acres of federal land as part of ANCSA, a settlement of Alaska Native’s aboriginal title claims. Though ANCSA was enacted more than 50 years ago, not all Alaska Native Corporations have completed their land selections. A significant barrier to the satisfaction of the land conveyances promised by ANCSA has been the federal government’s withdrawal of certain federal lands from the pool of lands available for selection. The Alaska EO reinstates five different Public Land Orders (PLO 7899, 7900, 7901, 7902, and 7903) that had made federal land available for selection by Alaska Native Corporations during President Trump’s first term (but were rescinded by President Biden’s administration in August 2024). The reinstatement of these Public Land Orders aims to make those lands available once again for selection by Alaska Native Corporations.

In addition, the order addressed two specific projects of substantial interest to particular Alaska Native Corporations. The Alaska EO directs federal agencies to facilitate “the expedited development of a road corridor between the community of King Cove and the all-weather airport located in Cold Bay” (commonly referred to as the Izembek Land Exchange). Second, it reverses the Biden administration’s decision regarding the Ambler Road project. These were both projects that advanced during President Trump’s first term, were halted during President Biden’s term, and have now been revived.

Tribal Fee Into Trust

Although President Trump has taken steps to reinstate PLOs 7899, 7900, 7901, 7902, and 7903 to support Alaska Native Corporations land selections, he is also revisiting the Biden administration’s determination that Alaska’s tribes could place land into trust for the purpose of asserting sovereignty over it. The Alaska EO declares the federal government will:

immediately review all Department of the Interior guidance regarding the taking of Alaska Native lands into trust and all Public Land Orders withdrawing lands for selection by Alaska Native Corporations to determine if any such agency action should be revoked to ensure the Department of the Interior’s actions are consistent with the Alaska Statehood Act of 1958 (Public Law 85-508), the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 3101 et seq.), the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 (43 U.S.C. 1601, et seq.), the Alaska Land Transfer Acceleration Act (Public Law 108-452), and the Alaska Native Vietnam-era Veterans Land Allotment Program under section 1629g-1 of title 43, United States Code.

During President Biden’s term, the DOI adopted the position that the federal government could take land into trust on behalf of Alaska’s federally recognized tribes, so those tribes could exercise sovereignty. Although a federal district court affirmed the DOI’s position that federal law permitted such a policy, the Alaska EO might signal that the Trump Administration is less willing to exercise that legal authority.

Subsistence

Finally, the Alaska EO signals support for the protection of Alaska Native subsistence rights. The order:

direct[s] all bureaus of the Department of the Interior to consider the Alaskan cultural significance of hunting and fishing and the statutory priority of subsistence management required by the ANILCA, to conduct meaningful consultation with the State fish and wildlife management agencies prior to enacting land management plans or other regulations that affect the ability of Alaskans to hunt and fish on public lands, and to ensure to the greatest extent possible that hunting and fishing opportunities on federal lands are consistent with similar opportunities on State lands….

Evaluation of the practical effect of this directive will have to wait until we see how federal agencies implement it, but it signals the Trump administration will take a more expansive view of the rights of Alaska Natives, and citizens of Alaska, to engage in subsistence hunting and fishing.

Conclusion

The effects of the Alaska EO will not be immediately apparent, but it demonstrates a significant departure from the Biden administration’s approach to land management and natural resource development. Instead of focusing on conservation and protection of the environment, the Trump administration’s Alaska EO displays a sharp turn in favor of natural resource development and a loosening of the federal government’s reign over Alaska’s lands.

This article summarizes aspects of the law and does not constitute legal advice. For legal advice with regard to your situation, you should contact an attorney.