HB1605, titled the Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2025, would amend section 706 of title 5 of the U.S. Code to change how courts review agency actions. The bill directs reviewing courts to decide de novo all relevant questions of law when reviewing agency interpretations of constitutional provisions, statutes, and agency rules, rather than deferring to the agency’s interpretation. It also states that this standard applies to any judicial review of agency action authorized by law unless a statute specifically exempts it by direct reference to section 706.
In practical terms, the bill would strengthen the role of courts and weaken the interpretive authority of federal agencies in administrative cases. It would affect litigation under the Administrative Procedure Act and any other federal law that allows judicial review of agency action, potentially altering how courts handle regulatory disputes across a wide range of subject areas. The measure is framed as a separation-of-powers reform and would likely have broad implications for federal regulatory enforcement and rulemaking.
Impact
The bill would amend 5 U.S.C. § 706 to require courts to review legal questions in agency cases de novo and to apply that standard broadly to judicial review of agency action unless Congress expressly excludes a particular cause of action by specific reference. This would change existing administrative-law practice by limiting judicial deference to agency interpretations of statutes and regulations, and it could affect challenges involving federal agencies, regulations, permits, enforcement actions, and other administrative decisions.
Sentiment
The available legislative history suggests the bill has support among members who favor reducing agency deference and reinforcing judicial authority over statutory interpretation. Its committee disposition—ordered reported in the nature of a substitute by a 15-12 vote—indicates a divided but favorable committee outcome rather than unanimous support. The bill’s framing as a separation-of-powers measure suggests positive sentiment from proponents of administrative-law reform, while opponents likely view it as a significant shift away from established agency deference doctrines.
Contention
The main point of contention is whether courts should independently interpret laws and regulations in agency cases or continue to give agencies some level of deference. Supporters are likely to argue that the bill restores constitutional separation of powers and prevents agencies from effectively making law through interpretation. Opponents are likely to argue that it would undermine regulatory expertise, increase litigation, and create uncertainty across federal programs by inviting courts to second-guess agency judgments on a broad scale.