The nullification of recent Trump Administration regulations is yet another item on the busy agenda for congressional Democrats in the 117th Congress.  With Democrats holding both the presidency and narrow majorities in both chambers of Congress, some Democrats have advocated using the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to repeal Trump-era rules finalized after August 21, 2020, some of which could include:

  • A Department of Transportation rule raising the reporting threshold for gas pipeline property damage reports.
  • An Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule requiring the agency to rely more heavily on publicly available data.
  • An EPA Clean Air Act rule requiring the agency to focus only on the direct, rather than indirect, benefits of a given rule when conducting a cost-benefit analysis.
  • A Department of Justice rule changing evidentiary standards and shortening deadlines for asylum applications.
  • A Department of Housing and Urban Development rule raising the threshold required to prove a disparate impact claim under the Fair Housing Act.
  • A Securities and Exchange Commission rule amending procedural requirements for a shareholder to submit proposals at annual shareholder meetings.

The CRA creates expedited procedures that allow Congress to revoke certain agency rules by joint resolution.  A rule nullified under the CRA is treated “as though such rule had never taken effect,” and the agency is barred from reissuing a rule that is “substantially the same,” unless authorized by future law.  Because the president must sign a joint resolution of disapproval under the CRA, the statute is ordinarily only invoked when one party wins unified control of Congress and the White House from the opposing party.

Under the CRA, all executive branch agencies, as well as independent agencies and commissions, must submit a report to Congress before any new rules may take effect.  Once a rule is submitted, Congress generally has 60 legislative days in the House, or 60 session days in the Senate, to introduce and pass a joint resolution disapproving of the rule before it takes effect.

This 60-day period counts every calendar day, including weekends and holidays, but excludes days that either (or both) chamber is out of session for more than three days pursuant to an adjournment resolution.  Importantly, however, the CRA provides for a “lookback” period, which resets the 60-day deadline for rules submitted to Congress within 60 days of adjournment.  While the Senate and House Parliamentarians officially determine whether a rule is subject to disapproval under the CRA, we expect that any rules submitted after August 21, 2020 will likely fall within the lookback period and thus be subject to CRA disapproval in the new Congress.

One major advantage to using the CRA to revoke an undesirable regulation is the expedited procedures that it provides, particularly in the Senate.  Notably, Senate consideration of a joint resolution of disapproval is debate limited and not subject to filibuster.  Additionally, if it has been more than 20 calendar days since Congress’ receipt of the final rule, and a joint resolution has not been reported out of the appropriate jurisdictional committee, a group of 30 Senators can file a petition to force a floor vote on the petition.

Prior to the Trump Administration, the CRA had been successfully used once to revoke the outgoing Clinton administration’s final ergonomics regulations; however, the 115th Congress (2017-2018) overturned a total of 16 Obama-era rules using the CRA.

While the CRA is not the only tool that Congress can use to shape agency action, it offers a powerful, streamlined mechanism to revoke recently enacted rules issued by the previous administration.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Holly Fechner Holly Fechner

Holly Fechner advises clients on complex public policy matters that combine legal and political opportunities and risks. She leads teams that represent companies, entities, and organizations in significant policy and regulatory matters before Congress and the Executive Branch.

She is a co-chair of…

Holly Fechner advises clients on complex public policy matters that combine legal and political opportunities and risks. She leads teams that represent companies, entities, and organizations in significant policy and regulatory matters before Congress and the Executive Branch.

She is a co-chair of the Covington’s Technology Industry Group and a member of the Covington Political Action Committee board of directors.

Holly works with clients to:

Develop compelling public policy strategies
Research law and draft legislation and policy
Draft testimony, comments, fact sheets, letters and other documents
Advocate before Congress and the Executive Branch
Form and manage coalitions
Develop communications strategies

She is the Executive Director of Invent Together and a visiting lecturer at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. She serves on the board of directors of the American Constitution Society.

Holly served as Policy Director for Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) and Chief Labor and Pensions Counsel for the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee.

She received The American Lawyer, “Dealmaker of the Year” award in 2019. The Hill named her a “Top Lobbyist” from 2013 to the present, and she has been ranked by Chambers USA – America’s Leading Business Lawyers from 2012 to the present. One client noted to Chambers: “Holly is an exceptional attorney who excels in government relations and policy discussions. She has an incisive analytical skill set which gives her the capability of understanding extremely complex legal and institutional matters.” According to another client surveyed by Chambers, “Holly is incredibly intelligent, effective and responsive. She also leads the team in a way that brings out everyone’s best work.”

Photo of Matthew Shapanka Matthew Shapanka

Matthew Shapanka is a strategic policy and regulatory attorney who helps technology companies and other businesses navigate complex, high-stakes legislative, regulatory, and enforcement matters at the intersection of law and politics. Drawing on 15+ years of experience across private practice, the U.S. Senate…

Matthew Shapanka is a strategic policy and regulatory attorney who helps technology companies and other businesses navigate complex, high-stakes legislative, regulatory, and enforcement matters at the intersection of law and politics. Drawing on 15+ years of experience across private practice, the U.S. Senate, state government, and political campaigns, Matt develops comprehensive policy strategies that identify regulatory risks and position clients to shape policy outcomes.

Public Policy and Regulatory Strategy

Matt serves as a strategic advisor to Fortune 200 companies on emerging technology policy, including artificial intelligence regulation, connected and autonomous vehicles, semiconductors, IoT, and national security matters. He translates complex legal and technical issues into actionable legislative and regulatory strategy, building the policy frameworks and advocacy infrastructure that enable clients to influence policy. He develops policy collateral for federal, state, and international advocacy, coordinates multi-stakeholder coalitions, and represents clients before Congress, federal agencies, and state legislative and regulatory bodies.

His technology policy experience includes securing unprecedented Presidential intervention in the $118 billion Qualcomm-Broadcom transaction (for which Covington was recognized as The American Lawyer 2019 “Dealmakers of the Year”), advising Fortune 200 companies on Bureau of Industry and Security connected vehicle rules, and counseling major internet platforms on autonomous vehicle policy across dozens of states.

Matt leads Covington’s state public policy practice, managing complex multistate legislative and regulatory advocacy campaigns. His state-level work includes securing a last-minute amendment to California’s 2023 money transmitter legislation on behalf of a fintech client and representing major technology companies on state AI, autonomous vehicle, and political advertising compliance matters across dozens of jurisdictions.

Matt rejoined Covington after serving as Chief Counsel for the U.S. Senate Committee on Rules and Administration under Chairwoman Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), where he negotiated the landmark bipartisan Electoral Count Reform Act – legislation that updated presidential election certification procedures for the first time in nearly 140 years. He also oversaw the Committee’s bipartisan January 6th investigation, developing protocols that resulted in unanimous passage of new Capitol security legislation.

Both in Congress and at Covington, Matt has prepared dozens of corporate executives, nonprofit leaders, academics, and presidential nominees for testimony at congressional committee hearings and depositions. He is a skilled legislative drafter and strategist who has composed dozens of bills and amendments introduced in Congress and state legislatures, including many that have been enacted into law.

Election and Political Law Compliance and Enforcement

As a member of Covington’s Chambers-ranked (Band 1) Election and Political Law practice, Matt advises businesses, nonprofits, political committees, candidates, and donors on the full range of federal and state political law compliance matters, including:

Election and campaign finance laws
Lobbying disclosure
Government ethics rules
The SEC Pay-to-Play Rule

He also conducts political law due diligence for M&A transactions, counsels major political funders and donors in compliance and enforcement matters, and represents candidates, ballot measure committees, and donors in election disputes and recounts.

Before law school, Matt served in the administration of former Governor Deval Patrick (D-MA), where he worked on policy, communications, and compliance matters for federal economic recovery funding awarded to the state. He has also staffed federal, state, and local political candidates in Massachusetts and New Hampshire.