PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jan 9, 2025
Sunset Chevron ActThis bill requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to compile a list of federal agency rules that were upheld under the administrative law doctrine of Chevron deference. It also establishes sunset dates for the rules and requires the GAO list to include the dates.
(In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court overturned Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council and held that courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority. Under Loper, the courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous, as the Chevron doctrine required.)The GAO list must include each federal court decision that (1) upheld a rule based on Chevron deference, (2) was not subsequently overturned, and (3) pertains to a rule that is in effect on the date of enactment of this bill. The list must also include a sunset date for each identified rule.The sunset date for each agency's most recent rule on the list must be 30 days after the list is published. The sunset date for each prior rule of the agency must be 30 days after the sunset date of the rule preceding it on the list. Further, rules identified on the list are subject to a joint resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act without regard to the 60-legislative-day limit on the period for filing such a resolution after a rule has been received by Congress.
People & committees
Rep. Green, Mark E. [R-TN-7] · R–TN
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 19, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.274 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.274 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.274 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.274 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.