S-164-119
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Sponsored by Ron Johnson (R-WI)
What it does
This bill would amend the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to allow Congress to bundle multiple "midnight rules" — regulations finalized during the final year of a presidential term — into a single joint resolution of disapproval for an up-or-down vote. Currently, each rule must be considered and voted on separately. The bill would apply only to rules whose required reports were submitted to Congress during the last year of a president's term.
Who benefits
The incoming Congress and administration, which would gain a faster, more efficient tool to reverse large volumes of last-minute regulations. Industries and businesses subject to regulations finalized in a president's final year, who could see those rules overturned more quickly. Legislators who support deregulation broadly, as the procedural change lowers the time and political cost of repealing multiple rules. Small businesses that may have faced compliance costs from bundled rules.
Who is hurt
Beneficiaries of regulations that could be repealed in bulk — including workers protected by labor rules, consumers protected by financial or safety regulations, and environmental groups relying on environmental rules finalized in a president's final year. Advocacy organizations that currently benefit from the political difficulty of repealing each rule individually. Future administrations of either party whose late-term rules could be more easily reversed by a successor Congress. Regulated industries that invested in compliance with rules that may be retroactively nullified.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that outgoing administrations have a well-documented pattern of rushing through large volumes of regulations in their final months — the Obama administration finalized over 145 "economically significant" rules in its last year alone — and that the current one-rule-at-a-time CRA process makes it practically impossible for Congress to review them all within the statutory 60-day window. They contend that bundling disapproval resolutions restores Congress's ability to exercise meaningful oversight over the executive branch and fulfills the original intent of the CRA, which was to give Congress a real check on agency rulemaking.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that bundling multiple rules into a single vote strips Congress of the ability to evaluate each regulation on its own merits, forcing members into all-or-nothing choices that obscure accountability and reduce deliberation. They contend that the CRA's existing one-rule-at-a-time structure is a feature, not a flaw — it ensures each rule receives individual scrutiny — and that en bloc disapproval could sweep away rules with broad bipartisan support simply because they were finalized alongside controversial ones. Critics also note that the tool is asymmetric in practice, benefiting whichever party controls Congress after a transition.
Constitutional context
The Congressional Review Act operates under Congress's broad authority to structure and oversee executive agency rulemaking, rooted in the Necessary and Proper Clause (Art. I, §8, cl. 18) and the Vesting Clause (Art. I, §1). Post-Loper Bright (2024), courts independently assess whether agency rules exceed statutory authority, which increases the practical significance of CRA disapproval as an alternative check on agency action.
Checks and balances
Congress would gain a more efficient tool to nullify executive agency rules; the President retains veto power over any joint resolution of disapproval, and a two-thirds majority in both chambers would be required to override that veto.
Historical precedent
The original Congressional Review Act (1996) established the one-rule-at-a-time disapproval process; in 2017, Congress used the CRA to repeal 14 Obama-era rules individually, the most ever used in a single Congress, illustrating both the tool's power and its procedural burden under the current structure.