Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congress is using the Congressional Review Act to overturn a rule the Securities and Exchange Commission submitted. If this joint resolution is enacted, the named SEC rule would be void and have no force or effect. The CRA also prevents the agency from issuing a new rule that is substantially the same unless Congress enacts new legislation. This lets Congress quickly reverse certain recently finalized agency rules.
Form N-PORT and Form N-CEN Reporting; Guidance on Open-End Fund Liquidity Risk Management Programs (89 Fed. Reg. 73764, Sept. 11, 2024).
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
Under the CRA, disapproval resolutions receive expedited consideration in the Senate with limited debate and cannot be filibustered, so they can pass with a simple majority. The joint resolution still must be passed by both chambers and be presented to the President for signature or veto.
This joint resolution disapproves, under the Congressional Review Act, an SEC rule titled "Form N–PORT and Form N–CEN Reporting; Guidance on Open‑End Fund Liquidity Risk Management Programs" (89 Fed.
Reg. 73764).
If enacted, the resolution would nullify that SEC rule and prevent it from taking effect.
Narrow, low‑cost disapproval has an easier House path but faces significant Senate procedural and executive obstacles absent broad bipartisan support.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise congressional disapproval resolution under the Congressional Review Act that plainly identifies and nullifies a single SEC rule. It accomplishes its narrow objective with minimal textual complexity and leans on existing statutory machinery for procedural and consequential effect.
Progressives emphasize investor transparency and SEC expertise.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize investor transparency and SEC expertise.
Likely opposes the resolution as a rollback of regulatory oversight and investor protections.
Views congressional nullification of an SEC rule as weakening transparency and liquidity risk management for mutual funds.
Approaches the resolution with caution, weighing investor protections against compliance costs.
Concerned both about potential overreach by the SEC and about Congress using the CRA to override technical regulatory judgments.
Generally supports the resolution as a check on regulatory overreach and unnecessary compliance burdens.
Views disapproval as protecting funds and investors from costly, ambiguous SEC mandates.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, low‑cost disapproval has an easier House path but faces significant Senate procedural and executive obstacles absent broad bipartisan support.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize investor transparency and SEC expertise.
Narrow, low‑cost disapproval has an easier House path but faces significant Senate procedural and executive obstacles absent broad bipartis…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a concise congressional disapproval resolution under the Congressional Review Act that plainly identifies and nullifies a single SEC rule. It accomplishes its narr…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.