Montana Senators Push to Ban Russian Mineral Imports—But Is It About Jobs or Sanctions?

Montana’s senators are backing a new bipartisan bill that aims to ban the import of critical minerals from Russia, including copper, platinum, and palladium. While supporters argue it will protect American mining jobs and strengthen domestic supply chains, the bill’s specific focus on Russia raises questions about whether its primary aim is American jobs or geopolitical sanctioning.

Senators Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.), and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) introduced the bill, citing the need to reduce reliance on foreign sources of critical minerals.

“There is no reason the United States should run to Russia for critical minerals that can be found right here at home, including in Montana,” Daines said in a statement. He blamed the Biden administration for previous struggles in the American mining industry, adding that “we’re turning a new leaf with President Trump, and this bill will put American mines and American jobs first.”

Sheehy echoed the sentiment, framing the legislation as an “America First” policy that will strengthen national security while boosting domestic production. He highlighted that “hardworking Montanans in the mining industry suffered while their federal government spent their tax dollars on overseas minerals that we can get here at home.”

The bill would prohibit the import of several key minerals from Russia—including copper, palladium, platinum, and nickel—until Russia ceases hostilities with Ukraine. This condition ties the legislation to broader geopolitical strategy rather than a straightforward effort to protect American jobs. While the bill’s supporters argue that it will protect American jobs, it does not place similar restrictions on minerals from other foreign competitors, such as China or South Africa, which also play major roles in the global mineral market.

Daines introduced a similar bill in the 118th Congress after 700 workers were laid off at Montana’s Sibanye-Stillwater Mine. He blamed the Biden administration for failing to protect U.S. miners from cheap Russian palladium and platinum, which continued to enter the market despite sanctions on other Russian minerals. While the administration could have imposed tariffs or eased environmental regulations to help domestic producers compete, no such measures were taken, allowing global market forces to drive down prices and put pressure on American mining jobs.

Montana has a rich history of copper mining, particularly in Butte, once known as the “Richest Hill on Earth.” The state still has active mining operations, including those producing some of the same minerals listed in the bill. While the legislation could provide short-term relief for Montana miners by curbing Russian competition, it does not tackle broader industry challenges like restrictive environmental policies or mineral imports from other nations.

The National Mining Association has thrown its support behind the bill, with President and CEO Rich Nolan stating that “the United States needs to urgently redouble efforts to build the secure, responsible mineral supply chains that underpin our economic and national security.”

However, critics may argue that a true commitment to domestic mining would involve broader reforms, including investment in processing capabilities and regulatory changes, rather than selectively targeting Russian imports. As the bill moves forward, Montanans will be watching closely to see whether it delivers real economic benefits for the state’s miners—or if it serves primarily as a geopolitical maneuver under the guise of job protection.