Checks and Balances, June 2025

By

Ballotpedia staff

Highlights from this edition of Checks and Balances include deep dives into the elimination of REINS from the One Big Beautiful Bill and Oklahoma’s 2025 legislation on agency rules. 

In Washington

One Big Beautiful Bill Act goes to Senate without REINS 

What’s the story?

The U.S. House removed administrative state-related provisions from the final version of H.R. 1—the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—that were originally present in the introduced version of the bill. H.R. 1 is the 2025 budget reconciliation bill, which means it can avoid filibuster in the Senate and pass with simple majority support (51 votes) instead of 60% support (60 votes).

The cut provisions included the following, based on the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act that would have increased congressional oversight of federal agency rulemaking:

  • Requirements for agency reports on certain proposed agency actions (including those with an annual economic impact of $100 million or more),

Additional administrative state reforms deleted from the final House version included: 

  • A Midnight Rules Relief Act-like provision amending the CRA to allow Congress to reject multiple agency rules using one resolution of disapproval if the rules were submitted during the final year of a president’s term.
  • Sunset review provisions requiring agencies to designate at least 20% of their active rules for congressional review every year for the next five years. Submitted rules would have needed a joint resolution of approval within 90 days to remain in effect. At the end of five years, agency rules that were not approved would have expired.
  • Additional reporting requirements for submitting a rule for review under the CRA. 

A new provision, titled a Deregulation Initiative, replaced the previous administrative state reform language in Sec. 70200 of the revised bill. It proposes appropriating $100 million to the Office of Management and Budget for improving regulatory processes and analyzing and reviewing rules issued by seven agencies: the Departments of Education,  Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, and Justice; the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau; and the Environmental Protection Agency. The Social Security Administration would be exempted from these requirements. 

H.R. 1 passed the U.S. House of Representatives 215-214 on May 22. No Democrats and 215 Republicans voted in support; 212 Democrats and two Republicans opposed the bill. On June 11, the House passed several changes and corrections to the bill through a rule resolution (H.Res.492) and approved it again.

The Senate will now consider the bill, which could be amended before being sent to President Donald Trump (R). The Senate released some details on planned amendments on June 16. 

Why does it matter? 

Supporters wanted REINS provisions in the budget bill to boost fiscal and regulatory oversight. House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R), whose committee added the reforms to the original bill,  argued, “Part of our jurisdiction in Judiciary deals with regulatory concerns, and so we are looking at … spending and costs associated with certain regulations. That’s why that language is written the way it was.” 

Sen. Mike Lee (R), a cosponsor of the REINS Act in the 119th Congress, said, “Unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats make 100,000 pages of new ‘laws’ a year. We need the REINS Act.” On including REINS in H.R. 1, Sen. Lee commented, “There is almost an infinite number of combinations we’re looking at to figure out how we can bring about, if not the ‘REINS Act’ itself in its entirety, [then] elements of it or features of it.” 

Sen. Dick Durbin (D), the Democratic minority whip, said,  “It would be a war on regulations. To take that authority away from the executive branch would be a serious mistake.” Advocacy organization Food & Water Watch wrote the REINS provisions would have “rolled back many protections and required more Congressional oversight over major agency regulations. This would have hamstrung agencies’ ability to protect our food and water.” 

What’s the background?

Versions of the REINS Act have been introduced in every Congress since 2009. The U.S. House of Representatives passed several versions of the bill, but it never gained approval in the Senate. Rep. Kat Cammack (R) reintroduced the act on January 3, 2025, in the 119th United States Congress.  

Senators debated whether REINS provisions would be allowed in the 2025 budget reconciliation package under procedural rules. Senators can use the Byrd Rule to challenge provisions in budget reconciliation bills. Senators can raise points of order seeking to remove provisions they think fall outside of the budget reconciliation directives or that are otherwise defined as extraneous. The vice president, as the presiding officer of the Senate, rules on Byrd Rule points of order and decides whether provisions are kept or cut. The Senate parliamentarian advises the vice president as part of that decision-making process.

To avoid removal during the Byrd Rule process, Sen. Lee suggested using placeholder language in the bill and relying on supportive senators to influence the parliamentarian and vice president. Sen. Todd Young (R) said, “I don’t know if it would survive Byrd, but I support the effort.”

Economist James Broughel commented, “The reforms may not all survive the Senate parliamentarian’s scrutiny.” Clyde Wayne Crews of the Competitive Enterprise Institute said the Senate’s budget reconciliation procedures would likely remove the provisions if they passed the House. 

The budget reconciliation bill has no technical due date. President Trump asked Congress to send him a bill by July 4. The federal government’s funding will run out on Sept. 30 without Congress passing new appropriations legislation.   

Want to go deeper?

__________________________________________________________________________

In the states

Oklahoma enacts four administrative reforms

What’s the story?

Oklahoma enacted the following four laws increasing legislative and executive oversight of agency rules and eliminating judicial deference to agency determinations during the 2025 legislative session:

  1. House Bill 2728, named the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act of 2025, defines a cost threshold for major rules. The bill directs the Legislative Office of Fiscal Transparency (LOFT) to independently review and verify economic impact statements for rules with implementation and compliance costs exceeding $1 million over five years and to report on such rules to the legislature. The bill defines these as major rules. HB 2728 passed mostly along party lines, but six of 18 House Democrats supported and two of 80 House Republicans opposed the legislation. One Senate Democrat out of eight supported the bill.
  2. Senate Bill 995 amends the Oklahoma Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to require that all permanent rules, including major rules defined in HB 2728, be approved by a joint resolution of the legislature to take effect. The House passed the bill unanimously, and the Senate passed it along party lines.
  3. Senate Bill 1024 increases executive control of agencies by prohibiting the adoption of proposed rules without approval from the governor or the appropriate cabinet secretary. SB 1024 also requires agencies to provide rule impact statements, including analysis of alternatives and costs of developing the rule. Three of 18 House Democrats and all House Republicans voted in support; the Senate voted along party lines.
  4. House Bill 2729 amends the APA to (1) prohibit state courts from deferring to agency interpretations and (2) require de novo consideration of legal questions. De novo review is a no-deference standard that requires courts to make independent interpretations. HB 2729 also requires state courts to give a “reasonable interpretation which limits agency power and maximizes individual liberty” when there is ambiguity. The bill passed both chambers along party lines. 

Why does it matter? 

These bills shift rulemaking authority from state agencies to the legislative, executive, and judicial branches of Oklahoma’s government. The enacted legislation is part of a broader debate over whether elected officials and judges should decide policy and legal questions or if they should defer to administrators. 

What are the arguments?

Sen. Micheal Bergstrom (R), chair of the Senate Administrative Rules Committee, said, “Through these measures, we are reaffirming the Legislature’s constitutional authority and rebalancing the power between unelected bureaucrats and the people’s elected representatives.” Rep. Gerrid Kendrix (R) commented, “It is our constitutional responsibility to preserve the boundaries of government power and to protect the liberty of the governed.”

Martha Kinsella, an opponent of similar state laws and former senior counsel of the Brennan Center for Justice, said, “Modern society requires expert-driven policymaking to address urgent contemporary challenges. The government agencies created by legislatures are essential to those endeavors. If the scope of federal administrative power continues to be curtailed, state courts’ recognition of the value of agency expertise may serve as a critical bulwark for evidence-based policymaking.”  

Background

Together, REINS-style law HB 2728 and SB 995 mandate that major rules undergo both an independent economic review (per HB 2728) and explicit legislative approval via joint resolution (per SB 995). A state has a REINS-style state law if it has the following two requirements: (1) a cost-benefit analysis requirement that defines a specific financial impact threshold and (2) proactive legislative action on any agency rule above the threshold before that rule can take effect. Seven states (Oklahoma, Kentucky, Utah, Kansas, Indiana, Wisconsin, and Florida) had enacted REINS-style state laws as of June 13, 2025. 

SB 1024 made Oklahoma the second state to pass a bill modifying executive review of agency rules in 2025, along with Kentucky. 

HB 2729 made Oklahoma the third state to end judicial deference in 2025. Texas and Kentucky passed similar laws earlier in the year. A fourth bill in Missouri passed both legislative chambers and was sent to the governor’s desk on May 30. 

The Oklahoma Legislature adjourned on May 30. 

Ballotpedia tracks and analyzes legislative oversight laws (including REINS-style policies), judicial deference and review legislation, executive oversight requirements, and other categories as part of our administrative state legislation tracker. Ballotpedia uses five pillars to understand the administrative state. 

Want to go deeper?

___________________________________________________________________________

Featured Commentary

  • What Does Humphreys’ Executor Mean?  Nathaniel Wald Donahue of NYU School of Law argues that the president’s ability to remove members of independent federal agency boards may be limited if the agencies do not have executive enforcement powers. 

Want to go deeper? 

  • Click here to read the full text of the article.

___________________________________________________________________________

Regulatory highlight

Congressional Review Act

  • The Congressional Review Act (CRA) allows Congress to repeal rules with joint resolutions of disapproval. The 119th Congress has 60 working legislative days from the 15th day of the session to introduce resolutions to disapprove regulations the Biden administration issued after Aug. 16, 2024. The lookback period ended in early May.
    • 79 CRA resolutions have been introduced to repeal Biden-era regulations. Twenty resolutions crossed over, 16 have passed both chambers, and 14 were signed into law, as of June 12. 
    • In his two terms, President Donald Trump (R) has signed 30 of the 34 total CRA resolutions ever adopted. President George W. Bush signed one in 2001, and President Joe Biden signed three in 2021.

Notable regulation

  • The Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) completed its review of the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) proposal to enhance oversight of telecommunications certification bodies (TCBs) that review radio-frequency devices for compliance with FCC rules. 
  • OIRA reviewed this FCC rule in compliance with a February Trump executive order that required the office to review regulations from independent agencies. OIRA last reviewed an FCC rule in 1982, according to its website.

Want to go deeper? 

__________________________________________________________________________

Pick of the news

Federal

  • FEC loses quorum and cannot act: Commissioner’s resignation stalls the Federal Election Commission’s ability to enforce campaign finance laws. Politico 
  • Trump signs order requiring agencies to list regulatory violations with criminal penalties: Executive order discourages strict liability and encourages civil penalties when enforcement is warranted. The White House
  • White House directs federal agencies to stop considering climate change impacts: Rulemaking can no longer estimate the monetary impact of greenhouse gas emissions except where required by law. New York Times 
  • Trump signs CRA resolution nullifying CFPB overdraft rule: The rule had capped fees on overdraft services offered by financial institutions with assets over $10 billion. Ballotpedia
  • Trump signs CRA resolution nullifying CFPB digital consumer payment regulatory authority rule: The rule had established the CFPB’s supervisory authority over larger participants in the digital payment applications market. Ballotpedia
  • Federal judge invalidates DOGE’s dismissal of U.S. Institute of Peace leadership: Court action nullifies DOGE-ordered personnel changes, headquarters transfer, and asset transfer. The Hill 
  • Supreme Court lets administration dismiss independent agency board members: Temporary ruling reverses lower court directive prohibiting firing heads of the National Labor Relations Board and Merit Protection Board. NPR  
  • Supreme Court narrows scope for environmental reviews: Ruling allows agencies to limit consideration of climate impacts in permit decisions under the National Environmental Policy Act. Politico 
  • OPM proposes rule to terminate federal employees violating suitability standards: The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) rule would require removal within five days for employees accused of serious misconduct. Federal News Network 

State

  • Louisiana enacts REINS-style regulatory oversight bill: The legislature passed and the governor signed on June 8 a bill requiring legislative committee approval of rules with impacts of $200,000 per year or $600,000 over three years. Under the bill, if the committees don’t review the rule in 30 days, the governor can approve it. Ballotpedia
  • Alaska governor freezes publishing of new regulations: Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) orders state agencies to temporarily stop issuing new rules not already in a public notice phase. Alaska Beacon 
  • Missouri Legislature approves elimination of judicial deference: Bill sent to governor’s desk prohibits deference to agency interpretations and requires independent court review of agency actions. Ballotpedia

____________________________________________________________________________

Legislative tracking update

Since our last newsletter edition, Ballotpedia tracked significant legislative action (enactments, vetoes, and passage through both chambers) in 27 states on 138 bills related to the administrative state. Twenty-three states enacted or adopted 92 bills (including two through veto overrides in Oklahoma), 10 states passed 41 bills in both chambers, and governors in three states vetoed five bills.   

Ballotpedia has tracked a total of 1,848 bills related to the administrative state in 2025 as of June 17.