Should Congress take action to solidify the "separation of powers" concept?

This bill has Passed the House of Representatives
Bill Summary

This bill allows courts to review the actions of an agency from scratch and make rulings that aren’t related to previous rulings and interpretations from similar cases. This includes the interpretations of (1) constitutional and statutory provisions, and (2) rules made by agencies. Ultimately, the goal of the bill is to solidify the separation of powers concept. Sponsor: Rep. Scott Fitzgerald (Republican, Wisconsin, District 5)
View full bill text ➔

How do you feel?

You can still save your opinion to your scorecard, but since the vote has already taken place, your opinion won't be sent to your lawmakers.

Opponents say

  "H.R. 288 is likely to create a system in which agencies act to protect their interpretations by drafting unclear regulations. The regulations will have vague language with fewer details to prevent de novo reviews. Furthermore, geographic differences in regulatory uncertainty will increase. The Chevron test creates a stabilized system in which federal statutes are all given the same interpretational deference in circuit courts where judges are in conflict on regulatory Interpretation. This bill is another anti-regulatory attempt to attack federal regulation by harming the legal infrastructure. Most erroneously, H.R. 288 would put the general public in harms way, resulting in impaired safeguards for civil rights, consumer rights, health, the environment, safety, financial markets, and all concerns of federal regulatory statutes." Source: Brielle L Green (Senior Legislative Counsel, Earthjustice)

Proponents say

  "The legislation, introduced by Representative Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI) earlier this year, would amend the Administrative Procedure Act to require courts to conduct a de novo (from scratch) review of all relevant questions of law and regulation when they are called into question. This would help restore constitutional order and reassert Congress’s role in writing the laws and the Court’s job in interpreting them." Source: Matthew Adams (Competitive Enterprise Institute)