Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
The bill requires every bill or joint resolution to contain no more than one subject and mandates that the subject be clearly and descriptively expressed in the title. It bars appropriations bills from including general legislation not germane to the bill and voids Acts or provisions that violate these rules.
Progressive worries courts will be used to block policy packages
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear single-subject requirement and a judicial enforcement mechanism, but leaves important interpretive and implementation details unspecified.
The bill requires every bill or joint resolution to contain no more than one subject and mandates that the subject be clearly and descriptively expressed in the title.
It bars appropriations bills from including general legislation not germane to the bill and voids Acts or provisions that violate these rules.
It creates a private cause of action (open to any person, including Members of Congress) for injunctions against laws that do not comply and sets de novo judicial review.
Major procedural overhaul with broad, contested consequences and weak compromise features; high litigation risk deters enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear single-subject requirement and a judicial enforcement mechanism, but leaves important interpretive and implementation details unspecified.
Progressive worries courts will be used to block policy packages
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressive worries courts will be used to block policy packages
Skeptical.
Appreciates transparency aims but worries the provision enabling private lawsuits and voiding laws will be used to block comprehensive progressive legislation.
Concerned courts will invalidate complex policy packaged for practical reasons.
Mixed but cautiously favorable toward the transparency goal.
Supports clearer bills and fewer unrelated riders but worries about procedural disruption, litigation delays, and impacts on necessary complex legislation like appropriations.
Generally supportive.
Values forcing one-subject bills to curb riders, pork, and broad partisan omnibus packages.
Views judicial enforcement as a useful tool to hold Congress to procedural discipline.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Major procedural overhaul with broad, contested consequences and weak compromise features; high litigation risk deters enactment.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressive worries courts will be used to block policy packages
Major procedural overhaul with broad, contested consequences and weak compromise features; high litigation risk deters enactment.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill establishes a clear single-subject requirement and a judicial enforcement mechanism, but leaves important interpretive and implementation details unspecified.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.