Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) and Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Sept. 18 reintroduced the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act in the 118th Congress with four additional provisions that would:
- Authorize individuals to “argue that the average person would not have known their actions violated federal law if the [statute] did not clearly state it” during agency enforcement proceedings.
- Authorize individuals to file a lawsuit against the enforcement of any agency rule and allow courts to invalidate the rule or classify it as a major rule subject to the REINS Act.
- Require congressional approval of agency guidance (not just rules) with an economic impact of $100 million or more.
- Exempt deregulatory agency actions from the congressional approval requirement.
The background
The REINS Act is a legislative proposal that would require congressional approval of major agency rules with an economic impact of $100 million or more before they can take effect. It would broaden the Congressional Review Act (CRA), which currently allows Congress to block agency regulations after they take effect with resolutions of disapproval.
Republican lawmakers have introduced the REINS Act during every session of Congress since 2009. The previous versions of the REINS Act were identical. The 2024 reintroduction proposes the first changes to the legislation in 15 years.
The bill is part of a broader debate surrounding the balance of power between the legislative and executive branches in relation to administrative rulemaking. Supporters argue the legislation would restore the separation of powers, make Congress accountable for regulatory decisions, and increase transparency in the rulemaking process.
Opponents argue the act could hinder the efficiency of regulatory agencies, delay necessary regulations, and undermine agencies’ expertise in topics where Congress lacks detailed knowledge. They also say it would increase political gridlock.
Additional reading: