Highlights from this edition of Checks and Balances include deep dives into President Trump’s memo directing agencies to repeal regulations without public notice and comment and Texas’ state DOGE-style and judicial nondeference bill.
In Washington
Trump directs agencies to skip public input for deregulation
What’s the story?
President Donald Trump (R) issued a memorandum April 9 directing federal administrative agencies to revoke regulations they believe are unlawful without the standard 30- to 60-day public notice and comment period under the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA). It was Trump’s 37th memo during his second term.
The memo orders agencies to prioritize immediate elimination of rules that may conflict with recent Supreme Court rulings based on criteria outlined in Executive Order 14219, issued Feb. 19. The executive order specifically targets regulations the Trump administration believes:
- Exceed an agency’s statutory authority (Loper Bright v Raimondo, West Virginia v. EPA, Sackett v. EPA).
- Fail to explain the reason for a rule or consider all costs and benefits (Ohio v. EPA, Michigan v. EPA).
- Are unconstitutional (SEC v. Jarkesy, Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, Carson v. Makin, Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo).
What are the arguments?
The Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) supported the memo. Wayne Crews—a CEI regulatory studies fellow—argued, “This new initiative goes beyond previous orders invoking typical platitudes about efficiency, cost-benefit and ‘outdated, unnecessary, or ineffective’ by specifically invoking ‘deconstruction’ of an administrative state now largely regarded as unconstitutional and irredeemable.”
The Economic Policy Institute opposed the move, arguing, “If this directive were allowed to proceed, federal agencies acting at the direction of the Trump administration would be able to quickly get rid of regulations that protect health and safety for workers and consumers, safeguard the public against financial fraud and scams, and protect the environment, all without any opportunity for the public to express opposition and participate in the democratic process.”
Why does it matter?
The administration based its position on the good cause exception in the APA, which allows agencies to skip notice and comment to repeal rules that conflict with the public interest. The memo argued, “Retaining and enforcing facially unlawful regulations is clearly contrary to the public interest. … Notice-and-comment proceedings are unnecessary where repeal is required as a matter of law to ensure consistency with a ruling of the United States Supreme Court.”
The good cause exception is typically reserved for emergencies requiring rapid regulatory action. Roger Nober, director of George Washington University’s Regulatory Studies Center, says Trump’s approach represents “a significant change to the way regulation is typically done.” He argued courts could rule against it and require retroactive notice and comment for eliminated rules.
What’s the background?
EO 14219 required agencies to identify targeted regulations within 60 days of the order’s publication on Feb. 19. The memo did not specify a minimum or maximum number of regulations to be reviewed or eliminated.
EO 14219 exempted rules in the following three categories: “(a) any action related to a military, national security, homeland security, foreign affairs, or immigration-related function of the United States; (b) any matter pertaining to the executive branch’s management of its employees; or (c) anything else exempted by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.”
Want to go deeper?
- Donald Trump’s executive orders and actions 2025
- The Administrative Procedures Act
- White House Memorandum directing the repeal of unlawful regulations
- Executive Order 14219
- Loper Bright v Raimondo
____________________________________________________________________________
In the states
Texas governor signs state DOGE, judicial nondeference bill
What’s the story?
Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) signed Senate Bill 14 into law April 23, creating a new department tasked with promoting efficiency in the state government and prohibiting judicial deference to administrative agencies. Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R) said the approach is modeled on President Donald Trump’s (R) federal-level Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
The new law establishes the Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office under the governor’s office, responsible for identifying inefficiencies, reporting efficiency recommendations biennially, and creating informational materials on efficient governance. It also:
- Creates a Regulatory Efficiency Advisory Panel, which advises the Regulatory Efficiency Office and sets regulatory reduction goals for state agencies.
- Requires agencies to publish rules and affected businesses online.
- Requires courts to independently review contested cases, eliminating deference to agency interpretations.
The state House approved SB14 by 97-51 on April 9, with 84 Republicans and 13 Democrats voting for the bill and two Republicans and 49 Democrats against it. The state Senate approved SB14 by 26-5 on March 26, with 19 Republicans and seven Democrats voting in favor and one Republican and four Democrats voting against.
What are the arguments?
Abbott supported the bill’s efficiency measures, saying, “This law will slash regulations, put stricter standards on new regulations that could be costly to businesses, and put a check on the growth of the administrative state … ensuring that Texas operates at the speed of business.” Texas Rep. Brian Harrison (R) opposed the bill, saying, “The point of DOGE is to cut government, reduce spending and shrink the bureaucracy. Unfortunately, this bill does the exact opposite.”
Jen Springman, coalitions manager at the Goldwater Institute, supported the bill’s removal of judicial deference for agency legal interpretations, saying, “This change will protect individual liberty by ensuring that courts are not bound to being overly deferential to agencies seeking to expand their own power via rulemaking.” Adrian Shelley, Texas director of Public Citizen, opposed the deference removal, saying, “SB 14 would further undermine existing protections … ending Chevron deference allows ideological judges to substitute their policy preferences for the expertise of state agencies. It’s a rejection of science and a step backward for Texas.”
Tracking government efficiency bills
SB14 is one of 52 state-level bills Ballotpedia has tracked in 2025 related to government efficiency. It is the second state efficiency bill enacted this year, after Kentucky’s SR240 created a Discipline of Government Efficiency Task Force under the Kentucky Legislature. Bills in Idaho, Montana, Mississippi, and North Carolina have also passed at least one chamber.
The map below shows the current status of 2025 government efficiency bills in the states as of May 12.
Tracking judicial deference bills
SB14 is also the second state-level judicial nondeference bill enacted into law in 2025, after Kentucky’s SB84. These bills prohibit state courts from deferring to state regulatory agencies’ interpretation of laws, mirroring federal policy following the Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Overall, Ballotpedia is tracking 34 bills related to judicial deference in 2025.
Idaho, Indiana, Nebraska, and Utah have existing judicial deference laws enacted in 2024. All of those states have Republican trifectas. Kentucky has a divided government with a Democratic governor and Republican majorities in both legislative chambers.
The map below shows the status of 2025 judicial deference bills in the states as of May 12:
Want to go deeper?
- Department of Government Efficiency
- Deference (administrative state)
- Five pillars of the administrative state: Agency control
- Five pillars of the administrative state: Judicial control
___________________________________________________________________________
Featured commentary
The Unsettling of Notice and Comment argues that Trump’s removal of public notice and comment requirements could prevent proper deliberation in rescinding rules.
Want to go deeper?
____________________________________________________________________________
Regulatory tally
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 disapprove regulations the Biden administration issued after Aug. 16, 2024.
- So far in 2025, at least 76 CRA resolutions have been introduced to repeal Biden-era regulations. Fourteen resolutions crossed over, eight passed both chambers, nine were signed into law, and one was pending presidential approval as of May 13.
Notable regulation
- The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services issued a final rule on April 15. It implements several provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, including vaccine and insulin cost-sharing requirements.
Want to go deeper?
- Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services final rule
- Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
- Congressional Review Act
____________________________________________________________________________
Pick of the news
Federal
- Trump executive order requires agencies to add 1-year sunset to regulations: affects EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), DOE (Department of Energy), FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), and NRC (Nuclear Regulatory Commission). Holland & Knight
- Trump executive order prohibits agencies from considering potential negative impacts on protected groups in hiring: changes federal employee selection and hiring processes. Seyfarth
- Federal hiring freeze extended until July 15: limits agencies to one new hire for every four departing employees. Federal News Network, WhiteHouse.gov
- Supreme Court hears arguments in Oklahoma v. EPA on March 25: a case on whether the EPA overstepped its authority in enforcing federal air quality regulations on Oklahoma power plants. Ballotpedia
- Appeals court pauses DOGE records release: temporarily blocks a U.S. district judge’s order requiring the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to release records in a lawsuit challenging DOGE’s constitutionality. The Hill, New York Times
- Judge restricts DOGE’s access to Social Security data: argues access created privacy concerns. CBS News
- Justice Department firings trigger legal challenges: federal prosecutors appeal dismissals, alleging political motivation. New York Times
- House Judiciary Committee proposes REINS and accelerated congressional agency rule review in 2025 budget reconciliation. Ballotpedia (REINS), Ballotpedia (Budget reconciliation), Politico
- Trump issues more executive orders related to the administrative state:
- Strengthening Probationary Periods in the Federal Service
- Ensuring Commercial, Cost-Effective Solutions in Federal Contracts
- Restoring Common Sense to Federal Procurement
- Restoring Common Sense to Federal Office Space Management
- Maintaining Acceptable Water Pressure in Showerheads
- Zero-Based Regulatory Budgeting To Unleash American Energy
- Reducing Anti-Competitive Regulatory Barriers
- Click here to see all of Trump’s administrative state executive orders.
State
- Arizona Court of Appeals limits judicial review: judges base change on interpretation of recent statutory changes. Snell & Wilmer
- NC House passes REINS-style bill: proposed rules with economic impacts above $1 million subject to legislative review. Carolina Journal
- NC Senate advances bill to create DOGE-style office: DAVE Act would create a Division of Accountability, Value, and Efficiency. BPR News
- Montana legislature increases legislative oversight over rulemaking: bill requires legislative notification and consultation by agencies ahead of rulemaking. Ballotpedia
Legislative action for administrative state bills
Since our last newsletter edition, Ballotpedia tracked significant legislative action (enactments, vetoes, and passage through both chambers) in twenty-five states on 112 bills related to the administrative state. Eighteen states enacted or adopted bills, 15 states had bills pass both chambers, and one state (AZ) had a bill vetoed.
Ballotpedia has tracked a total of 1,534 bills related to the administrative state in 2025.
Read more about the categories we track here.
