Directing the Repeal of Unlawful Regulations – The White House

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

SUBJECT:       DIRECTING THE REPEAL OF UNLAWFUL REGULATIONS

Selling financial development and American innovation are high priorities of this Administration.  Illegal, pointless, and onerous rules impede these goals and impose huge prices on American customers and American companies.  Lately, the Supreme Court docket has issued a collection of selections that acknowledge acceptable constitutional boundaries on the ability of unelected bureaucrats and that restore checks on illegal company actions.  But, regardless of these vital course corrections, illegal rules — typically promulgated in reliance on now-superseded Supreme Court docket choices — stay on the books.

In step with these priorities and with my dedication to revive constancy to the Structure, on February 19, 2025, I issued Government Order 14219 (Making certain Lawful Governance and Implementing the President’s “Division of Authorities Effectivity” Deregulatory Initiative).  It directed the heads of all government departments and companies to determine sure classes of illegal and probably illegal rules inside 60 days and start plans to repeal them.  This review-and-repeal effort shall prioritize, specifically, evaluating every current regulation’s lawfulness beneath the next United States Supreme Court docket choices: 

1. Loper Shiny Enterprises v. Raimondo, 603 U.S. 369 (2024);
2. West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U.S. 697 (2022);
3. SEC v. Jarkesy, 603 U.S. 109 (2024);
4. Michigan v. EPA, 576 U.S. 743 (2015);
5. Sackett v. EPA, 598 U.S. 651 (2023);
6. Ohio v. EPA, 603 U.S. 279 (2024);
7. Cedar Level Nursery v. Hassid, 594 U.S. 139 (2021);
8. College students for Truthful Admissions v. Harvard, 600 U.S. 181 (2023);
9. Carson v. Makin, 596 U.S. 767 (2022); and
10. Roman Cath. Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, 592 U.S. 14 (2020).

In effectuating repeals of facially illegal rules, company heads shall finalize guidelines with out discover and remark, the place doing so is in line with the “good trigger” exception within the Administrative Process Act.  That exception permits companies to dispense with notice-and-comment rulemaking when that course of can be “impracticable, pointless, or opposite to the general public curiosity.”  Retaining and implementing facially illegal rules is clearly opposite to the general public curiosity.  Moreover, notice-and-comment proceedings are “pointless” the place repeal is required as a matter of regulation to make sure consistency with a ruling of the USA Supreme Court docket.  Companies thus have ample trigger and the authorized authority to instantly repeal illegal rules.

Accordingly, I hereby direct:

1. Following the 60-day evaluation interval ordered in Government Order 14219 to determine illegal and probably illegal rules, companies shall instantly take steps to effectuate the repeal of any regulation, or the portion of any regulation, that clearly exceeds the company’s statutory authority or is in any other case illegal.  Companies ought to give precedence to the rules in battle with the United States Supreme Court docket choices listed earlier on this memorandum.  The repeal of every illegal regulation shall be accompanied by a short assertion of the explanations that the “good trigger” exception applies.
2. Inside 30 days of the conclusion of the evaluation interval directed in Government Order 14219 to determine illegal and probably illegal rules, companies shall undergo the Workplace of Info and Regulatory Affairs a one-page abstract of every regulation that was initially recognized as falling inside one of many classes laid out in part 2(a) of that Government Order, however which has not been focused for repeal, explaining the premise for the choice to not repeal that regulation.