Do High-Cost Regulations Need a Judicial Review Before Going Into Effect? (H.R. 74)

What is H.R. 74?

(Updated March 22, 2018)

This bill — known as the REVIEW Act — would require federal agencies to delay high-impact regulations from going into effect until the public has 60 days to request a judicial review of the regulation. A “high-impact” regulation would be defined as any rule that imposes an annual cost of at least $1 billion on the economy, as determined by the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

If a legal challenge is filed within 60 days of the regulation’s publication, a hold would be put in place so the judicial review can proceed. If there’s no request for a judicial review within 60 days of the final rule appearing in the Federal Register, it would be allowed to go into effect.

Argument in favor

There needs to be an opportunity for interested parties to request a judicial review of a soon-to-be final regulation when the rule’s cost to America’s economy exceeds $1 billion.

Argument opposed

People or businesses that want to comment on pending regulations already have plenty of chances to have their voices heard long before a regulation take effect.

Impact

People and businesses wishing to file a public comment on a pending regulation; federal agencies with regulations that are soon-to-be final; and courts.

Cost of H.R. 74

During the 114th Congress the CBO estimated that enacting this legislation could increase spending, but it has no basis for determining the budgetary impact.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA) introduced this bill to prevent regulations from taking effect that may be reversed by legal challenges that are still pending:

“Agency rules can become effective while the legal process is underway and the costs to our economy are immediately incurred. These costs are significant and if the regulations are ultimately overturned, the damage is irreversible. Businesses across the country have no way of recovering the billions of dollars incurred in compliance costs. Those costs kill jobs, and prevent investment in our infrastructure and economy. The REVIEW Act provides certainty to the regulatory process, by halting billion dollar regulations until the legal proceedings surrounding their legitimacies and costs have concluded.”

House Democrats opposed this bill in the Judiciary Committee during the last Congress on the grounds that it would “severely undermine the efficiency of the rulemaking system” and would allow a regulation’s opponents to simply file lawsuits to delay it. Five of the Democrats on the committee joined to author the following explanation for their opposition to this bill:

“As with nearly every other anti-regulatory bill measure that the Committee has considered this Congress, [this bill] completely ignores the benefits of regulation and well-established law that shapes the rulemaking process. Rather than improving this process, the bill is simply a blatant effort to prevent the implementation of rules.”

This legislation passed the House Judiciary Committee on an 18-13 party-line vote in the last Congress before being passed 244-180 in the House. The Senate didn't vote on the bill before the conclusion of the 114th Congress. 

All of the current version of the bill’s 30 cosponsors are Republicans.

Media:

• Sponsoring Rep. Tom Marino (R-PA) Press Release (Previous Version)
• CBO Cost Estimate (Previous Version)