https://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/Judge-restores-Obama-era-drilling-ban-in-Arctic-13728872.phphttps://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/43/1341I dunno, I guess I can see the arguments of how the law doesn't explicitly say the president can withdraw a withdrawal, but there's also a logical argument that being able to withdraw a withdrawal is implicit in the nature of a withdrawal in this context
I think on appeal a point could be raised that if presidents in the past have used this authority or similar authorities to issue
temporary withdrawals, in particular those of indefinite duration that were rescinded eventually- it would make the case that withdrawing a withdrawal is implicit and congress has acquiesced to it sufficiently to establish its intent. Because any time you issue a temporary ban and then overturn it later, you're exercising the power once to withdraw it, and again once to withdraw the withdrawal. If the latter power didn't exist, it couldn't have been done.