By Cheryl Bolen
A legal theory about using the Congressional Review Act to repeal old rules retroactively has caught the attention of some lawmakers, but there are complicating factors and open questions that would have to be decided first, according to a former specialist at the Congressional Research Service.
The theory, founded by Todd Gaziano, executive director at the Pacific Legal Foundation in Washington, is that periodically over the last 20 years, agencies issuing a rule failed to submit a report to Congress as required by the CRA. That, according to the theory, means those rules are not lawfully in effect and Congress could still disapprove them.
“The question is: Is that sufficient to open up the whole scope of these [rules] for an indefinite period?” Richard Beth, a recently retired, 37-year veteran of the Congressional Research Service, said in an interview with Bloomberg BNA. “What are the limits on this?”
There are practical questions as well as remedies that have been and are available to Congress that complicate this seemingly straightforward theory on retroactive use of the CRA, Beth said.
Undisputed is that the CRA clearly requires any federal agency issuing a rule to submit a report with the text of the rule and any cost-benefit analysis to the House, Senate, and Government Accountability Office before the rule can take effect.
The report starts the clock on the opportunity for Congress to disapprove the rule. Gaziano’s theory is that for rules not lawfully in effect, Congress still has the opportunity to vitiate them by passing resolutions of disapproval.
“You could certainly make the argument that if the rule that should have been submitted wasn’t submitted, that it should never have taken effect,” Beth said.
But there are three reasons this is more complicated than it seems, Beth said.
First, the CRA states that “no determination, finding, action, or omission” in the act is subject to judicial review, which means the courts can’t rule and it will be up to Congress to decide, Beth said.
Second, there is the question of whether the effectiveness of the rule can be in doubt indefinitely, or whether at some point the argument could be made that Congress has “slept on its rights,” Beth said.
There is a mechanism that has developed in practice when Congress, or a committee of Congress, notices that a rule it’s interested in has been published or has taken effect or an agency is proposing to implement a rule or guidance without it having been submitted, Beth said.
In these cases, the committee can ask the GAO to submit the report on the rule required by the CRA, Beth said.
Moreover, it has been established, by practice at least, that the request to the GAO serves as the trigger for the time periods specified by the CRA, Beth said.
“Therefore, if a rule that should’ve been submitted isn’t submitted, there is, in practice, a remedy,” Beth said.
But if nobody uses that mechanism to repair the defect of a rule not being submitted in the time period when it should have been submitted, then couldn’t you argue that at some point, the Congress has slept on its rights? Beth said.
“It might well not be thought reasonable to just come back 15, 20, 50 years later and say, ‘Hey, wait a minute,’” Beth said.
The third reason is a question of procedure, because Congress could, at any time, not under the statute, but under its normal procedures, consider and pass a resolution with the same text as a CRA disapproval resolution, directing that the rule have no force or effect, Beth said.
“And that would certainly be good law and would suffice to vitiate the regulation,” Beth said. “Congress can always legislate in a way that overrides a regulation,” he said.
A normal resolution, however, would not have the advantage of the fast-track procedures of the CRA, which prevents amendments and limits debate in the Senate to no more than 10 hours.
The question would be: If such a resolution were introduced for a regulation that should have been submitted years ago, but wasn’t, would that resolution still be eligible for the fast-track procedure in the Senate? Beth said.
“And that would have to be determined by the parliamentarian,” Beth said, adding that it is entirely unpredictable what the parliamentarian might advise.
“The provision in the act that [proponents of the theory are] citing is certainly there, but what are the practical consequences? It would ultimately depend, in practice, on judgments made within Congress,” Beth said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Cheryl Bolen in Washington at firstname.lastname@example.org
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Paul Hendrie at pHendrie@bna.com
Copyright © 2017 The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)