Critical minerals are the backbone of modern technologies and national security, powering everything from advanced semiconductors and electric vehicle batteries to missile guidance systems and renewable energy infrastructure. As the global economy transitions to more diverse energy technologies, the demand for these essential materials has surged. Despite their vast importance and usefulness, the United States remains heavily dependent on foreign sources—particularly China—that dominate the global supply chain for critical minerals. This reliance threatens supply chain stability, leaving key American industries vulnerable to disruptions, price manipulations and political leverage.We have witnessed a multitude of actions from the White House in recent weeks ranging from new executive orders to the repeal of old ones. This includes the Trump administration’s Day One Executive Order entitled Unleashing American Energy, which directs U.S. government agencies to assess several trade and national-security-related actions (including stockpiling), prioritize geological mapping, and consider support for processing of critical minerals, among other things. That is not the entire federal government response, however. A number of congressional bills—many of them with bipartisan support—have been proposed in the 2025 legislative session in an effort to boost domestic extraction, refining and production of critical minerals.
Critical Materials Future Act of 2025 (S. 596)
Introduced by Senators John Hickenlooper (D-CO), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Chris Coons (D-DE) and Todd Young (R-IN), the Critical Materials Future Act of 2025 would establish a pilot program under the Department of Energy (DOE) to support domestic critical material processing projects—a key industry underdeveloped in the United States, resulting in the concentration of processing capabilities and facilities in certain countries. In the U.S., the critical mineral supply chain lacks a robust midstream sector for the processing and conversion of raw materials into high purity metals for specific end uses, resulting in the exporting of 93% of domestically mined rare earth elements (REEs) for refining in other countries. At present, the U.S. exports nearly its entire domestic mining supply of REEs for processing into finished products—often to China, which refines 92% of the global supply—only to buy the same REEs back in various forms of advanced technologies. The bill, if passed, would authorize $750 million for DOE to support at least three domestic mineral refining or recycling projects. Sen. Hickenlooper emphasized the need to “maintain American leadership” by boosting domestic processing, and in turn, reducing dependence on foreign adversaries for critical minerals. Similarly, Sen. Graham highlighted the risks posed by China’s control over critical mineral processing and the importance of building resilient domestic capabilities.
Unearth Innovation Act (S.598)
A second, similar bill was re-introduced by Sen. John Hickenlooper and joined by Thom Tillis (R-NC) on February 13, 2025. The Unearth Innovation Act would establish a Mineral and Mining Innovation Program within the DOE. Specifically, it would support research, development, deployment and commercialization of technologies for responsibly identifying, mining, extracting, processing and reprocessing minerals through strategic partnerships with academic institutions and the mining industry to accelerate new mining technologies and develop a skilled workforce. The Colorado School of Mines and the Society for Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration have expressed support for the legislation.
Securing Trade and Resources for Advanced Technology, Economic Growth, and International Commerce (STRATEGIC) Minerals Act (S.429)
Previous introduced in 2024, Senators Todd Young (R-IN), Chris Coons (D-DE), John Cornyn (R-TX) and John Hickenlooper are re-introducing the STRATEGIC Minerals Act in the 2025 session. The act would empower the President to negotiate and enforce sector-specific free trade agreements focused on critical minerals and REEs with trusted allies, while specifically excluding China. This legislative effort seeks to strengthen supply chains and reduce trade barriers with the cooperation of U.S. allies to ensure reliable access to these essential materials. While the Trump administration has imposed tariffs aggressively in its first few weeks in office (including on allies and partners), in its Day One executive orders entitled America First Trade Policy and Unleashing American Energy, the Administration charges the U.S. Trade Representative to identify countries with which the United States can negotiate bilateral or sector-specific agreements, and the Department of State to consider opportunities to advance mining and processing of minerals within the United States through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue.
Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2025 (S.714)
The Critical Mineral Consistency Act of 2025, introduced by Senators Mark Kelly (D-AZ), Jon Ossoff (D-GA), Bill Cassidy (R-LA), John R. Curtis (R-UT), James E. Risch (R-IS) and Mike Lee (R-UT), aims to harmonize the definitions of critical minerals across federal agencies by aligning the DOE’s Critical Materials List with the Critical Minerals List of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). This alignment seeks to reduce confusion among industries and federal agencies, ensuring that all vital resources receive equal treatment. If passed, the legislation would reduce agency see-sawing from one administration to the next. This effort underscores the importance of reconciling Congressional activity with initiatives within the executive branch. At present, President Trump wants to add copper to the nation’s critical minerals list, and Ned Mamula, the current USGS nominee, stated that he would make that change.
By expanding the definition of critical minerals to include materials deemed essential by the DOE, namely the addition of copper, the bill intends to strengthen domestic supply chains, bolster national security and support clean energy technologies. In 2024, the House passed a similar bill authored by Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.), but it ultimately failed to become law. The 2025 Senate version appears to have more promising prospects with bipartisan support from the start.
Conclusion
These legislative efforts reflect a relatively rare point of bipartisan consensus—securing and strengthening domestic supply chains of critical minerals is essential for national security, economic resilience and technological leadership. By reducing reliance on foreign sources, particularly China, these bills aim to foster domestic production, encourage innovation and build stronger trade alliances with trusted partners. However, the future of U.S. critical mineral policy remains uncertain, especially with shifting political dynamics and agency leadership changes. President Trump’s approach to trade, industry regulation and global partnerships could reshape the trajectory of these efforts. Through the first months of his term, his administration has sought to reduce federal spending on a wide range of programs and shrink the federal workforce, including within science, research and technology agencies. At the same time, in his recent address to Congress, the president expressed his desire to strengthen U.S. production of critical minerals and rare earths. Whether the administration’s efforts to slim down federal spending generally complicates these legislative efforts to increase support to the critical minerals sector remains to be seen. Regardless of political leadership, the fundamental need to ensure a stable, independent supply of critical minerals remains a strategic priority—one that will shape the country’s economic and security landscape for years to come.
Pillsbury will continue to monitor these legislative developments and provide updates as the process evolves.
RELATED ARTICLES
AI Needs Critical Materials, Fast! But From Where?
Critical Materials for the Energy Transition: Of “Rare Earths” and Even Rarer Minerals
