Menu

Midnight Rules Relief Act

FACT SHEET | Download PDF | February 27, 2025

The Midnight Rules Relief Act, H.R. 77 and S. 164, would amend the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to allow simultaneous disapproval of dozens of regulations finalized near the end of presidential terms using a single joint resolution.

The Effect of this Bill Would Be to:

  • Greatly expand the CRA’s anti-regulatory force by amplifying the harmful impact of the CRA’s “salt the earth” provision, which bars agencies from issuing new rules that are substantially the same as the rules that are repealed.
  • Make it easier for narrow majorities of lawmakers to repeal recently completed safeguards without the due consideration and deliberation that Congress should employ before taking such drastic steps.
  • Significantly constrain agencies’ authority to carry out their statutory missions to protect the public.

The Bill is Based on a Flawed Premise:

  • That regulations which are proposed or finalized during the so-called “midnight” rulemaking period are rushed and inadequately vetted. No evidence supports this.
  • The opposite is true:
    • The Biden Administration finalized regulations that increase overtime pay to put more money in the pockets of working families, limit carbon emissions from polluters to fight climate change, increase fuel efficiency standards to make cars cleaner, protect workers from harmful “non-compete” clauses in employment contracts, block companies from taking advantage of consumers with “junk fees,” put new limits on toxic “forever chemicals” that poison communities across the country, and many more.
    • Unlike CRA resolutions, which can sprint through Congress in just a few weeks, many of these regulations that will benefit the American public had been in the regulatory process for years.
  • In July 2016, Public Citizen released a report that compared rulemaking lengths for rules finalized at the end of the term or during the presidential transition period to those that were finalized outside of this period. The report found that rules issued during the presidential transition period spent even more time in the rulemaking process and received even more extensive vetting than other rules.
  • The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) also found that the “majority of the rules appear to be the result of finishing tasks that were initiated before the presidential transition period or the result of deadlines outside the agency’s control (such as year-end statutory or court-ordered deadlines).” ACUS concluded that “the perception of midnight rulemaking as an unseemly practice is worse than the reality.”

The Tragic Irony of The Midnight Rules Relief Act:

  • It would empower Congress to use the Congressional Review Act (CRA)—a process that is rushed, nontransparent, and discourages informed decision-making—to block rules that have completed the long journey through the rulemaking process.
  • Unlike the CRA’s expedited procedures, agency rules are subjected to many accountability mechanisms, and, for each rule, the agency must articulate a policy rationale that is supported by the rulemaking record and consistent with the requirements of the authorizing statute.
  • In contrast, members of Congress do not have to articulate a valid policy rationale—or any rationale at all—in support of CRA resolutions of disapproval.

Status of the Midnight Rules Relief Act:

  • R. 77l was passed by the House on February 12, 2025 by a vote of 212-208.
  • 124l was introduced in the Senate on January 21, 2025.

Opposition to The Midnight Rules Relief Act:

  • The following groups oppose the bill:
    • US, AFL-CIO, American Bird Conservancy, American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), Americans for Financial Reform, Animal Welfare Institute, CalWild, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Economic Integrity, Center for Food Safety, Center for Justice & Democracy, Center for Progressive Reform, Center for Responsible Lending, Center for Science in the Public Interest, Christian Council of Delmarva, Citizen Action/Illinois, Climate Action Campaign, Coalition for Sensible Safeguards, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, Consumer Federation of California, Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety, Cultivating Lives Educational Services, Inc., Earthjustice, Economic Action Maryland Fund, Economic Policy Institute, Endangered Habitats League, Endangered Species Coalition, Food & Water Watch, FOUR PAWS USA, Friends of the Earth, Government Information Watch, Greenpeace USA, Impact Fund, International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility, Kettle Range Conservation Group, Large Carnivore Fund, League of Conservation Voters, National Association for Latino Community Asset Builders, National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low-income clients), National Consumers League, National Employment Law Project, National Health Law Program, National Wolfwatcher Coalition, National Women’s Law Center, Natural Resources Defense Council, Oceana, P Street, People Power United, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Public Citizen, Public Justice, Public Justice Center, Resource Renewal Institute, RESTORE: The North Woods, Rise Economy, Sierra Club, Southern Environmental Law Center, Team Wolf, Texas Appleseed, Tzedek DC, Union of Concerned Scientists, United Steelworkers (USW), Vermont Public Interest Research Group, Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Womxn From The Mountain, Wyoming Wildlife Advocates.