Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to overturn a recent federal rule. If both chambers of Congress pass it and the President signs it (or Congress overrides a veto), the specified EPA rule would be nullified and have no legal force. The law also bars the agency from issuing a new rule that is substantially the same unless Congress enacts new legislation. The Senate can consider CRA disapproval measures under expedited procedures that limit debate.
California State Motor Vehicle and Engine and Nonroad Engine Pollution Control Standards; The "Omnibus" Low NOX Regulation; Waiver of Preemption; Notice of Decision (90 Fed. Reg. 643, January 6, 2025).
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
CRA disapproval measures use expedited procedures in the Senate that limit debate and are not subject to a filibuster, so they require only a simple majority; the resolution must also pass the House and be presented to the President for signature or veto.
This joint resolution under the Congressional Review Act would disapprove and nullify an EPA rule (90 Fed.
Reg. 643, Jan 6, 2025) that granted California a waiver of preemption for its Omnibus Low NOx motor vehicle, engine, and nonroad engine pollution-control standards.
If enacted, the specified EPA decision would be declared to have no force or effect, preventing California from implementing the waived standards under that rule.
Procedural advantages under the CRA increase feasibility, but high ideological salience, federalism conflict, and executive approval risk lower overall odds.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution: it clearly identifies the targeted rule and contains the standard operative language to nullify the rule. It relies on the CRA's established mechanism and does not attempt broader statutory changes.
Progressives emphasize environmental and public-health harms.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize environmental and public-health harms.
Likely strongly opposed.
They would view the resolution as blocking state innovation on air pollution control and undermining public health and climate goals.
They see the waiver as an important tool for stronger state-level standards.
Mixed/conditional.
Centrists would weigh benefits of national uniformity and reduced regulatory complexity against the loss of state-level innovation and public-health protections.
They would prefer a negotiated federal standard as an alternative.
Likely supportive.
Conservatives would view disapproval as limiting special treatment for California, reasserting national regulatory uniformity, and preventing state-driven burdens on industry and interstate commerce.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Procedural advantages under the CRA increase feasibility, but high ideological salience, federalism conflict, and executive approval risk lower overall odds.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize environmental and public-health harms.
Procedural advantages under the CRA increase feasibility, but high ideological salience, federalism conflict, and executive approval risk l…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward Congressional Review Act disapproval resolution: it clearly identifies the targeted rule and contains the standard operative language to nullify…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.