Federal agencies write the detailed rules that carry out the laws Congress passes — and under 5 U.S.C. 801 those rules take effect after the agency submits them, without a direct vote of Congress. The Congressional Review Act is the tool that lets Congress reach back into that process and cancel a rule outright. It works through a joint resolution of disapproval that moves on a fast track in the Senate, and if it is enacted the rule is treated as though it had never taken effect. This guide explains the mechanism, the deadlines, the one-time procedural advantages it carries, and the presidential veto math that governs whether a disapproval becomes law.
What does the Congressional Review Act do?
The Congressional Review Act, enacted in 1996 and codified at 5 U.S.C. sections 801 through 808 (chapter 8 of title 5), requires federal agencies to submit each rule to both chambers of Congress and to the Comptroller General before the rule can take effect. It then gives Congress a defined window to disapprove a rule using an expedited procedure. If a joint resolution of disapproval is enacted, the rule "shall have no force or effect."
What is a joint resolution of disapproval?
A joint resolution of disapproval is the specific vehicle the Act requires. Its operative text is fixed by statute — it must read: "That Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the ___ relating to ___, and such rule shall have no force or effect," with the blanks filled in with the agency name and the rule's title. Because it is a joint resolution, it follows the same path as a bill: both chambers must pass identical text and the President must sign it (or Congress must override a veto) for it to become law. For how that measure type works generally, see our guide on reading a bill's number and on joint versus concurrent resolutions.
How long does Congress have? The lookback window
The Act runs on deadlines tied to when an agency submits a rule. To qualify for the Senate's fast-track procedure, the Senate must act within a period of 60 days of Senate session after the rule is received and published. There is also a "lookback" mechanism: if an agency submits a rule near the end of a session — within 60 session or legislative days of Congress adjourning — the review clock resets and starts over in the next session, with the renewed period beginning on the 15th day of session in the Senate and the 15th legislative day in the House.
The practical effect of the lookback is that a rule submitted late in one session remains subject to disapproval after the next session convenes: under subsection (d) the review clock does not expire when Congress adjourns — it resets in the succeeding session.
Why can't the Senate filibuster a disapproval resolution?
The Act's central procedural feature is that it strips the Senate's usual delay tools from a qualifying disapproval resolution. Because 5 U.S.C. 802(d)(2) limits debate on the resolution to not more than 10 hours, a CRA disapproval resolution cannot be filibustered — ending debate does not require the supermajority cloture vote that most legislation needs. The expedited path has specific steps: at the end of 20 calendar days after the rule's submission, the committee may be discharged from further consideration upon a petition signed by 30 senators. Once the committee is discharged or the resolution is reported, any senator can move to proceed to the resolution; that motion is not subject to amendment, cannot be postponed, and all points of order against it are waived. Debate is then limited to not more than 10 hours, divided equally between the two sides, and no amendment is in order.
These advantages apply only in the Senate: 5 U.S.C. 802's expedited steps are written as Senate procedure, and the Act creates no comparable fast track in the House. A House disapproval resolution reaches the floor the ordinary way — see our guide on the Rules Committee. And because the Act directs that a resolution received from the other chamber "shall not be referred to a committee," a Senate-passed resolution sits before no House committee — so House supporters cannot use a discharge petition, which works by discharging a committee, to force one to the floor.
The "substantially the same" bar
Disapproval does more than cancel the specific rule. Under 5 U.S.C. 801(b)(2), a rule struck down by a disapproval resolution "may not be reissued in substantially the same form," and "a new rule that is substantially the same" may not be issued, unless the reissued or new rule "is specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the joint resolution." The statute itself does not define "substantially the same." The effect is concrete: an agency cannot repackage a disapproved rule and reissue it without new authority from Congress.
What role does the President's veto play?
A disapproval resolution only stops a rule once it is enacted — passed by both chambers and presented to the President, like any other law: 5 U.S.C. 801(b)(1) makes a rule's fate turn on whether "the Congress enacts a joint resolution of disapproval." The statute expressly anticipates a veto. 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(3)(B) sets out the timeline that applies if "the President signs a veto of such resolution" and either House then "votes and fails to override the veto of the President." Because a disapproval resolution can be vetoed like any other bill, cancelling a rule this way ultimately depends on the President's signature or a successful veto override — see our guide on the presidential veto for how an override works.
A worked example: H.J.Res. 140 and the Boundary Waters
LegislationPatch analyzed a completed CRA disapproval in the 119th Congress. H.J.Res. 140, signed into law on April 27, 2026, used the Act to cancel the Bureau of Land Management's Public Land Order No. 7917, which had withdrawn approximately 225,504 acres of National Forest System land in Cook, Lake, and Saint Louis counties, Minnesota — the area around the Boundary Waters — from mineral and geothermal leasing for 20 years. The resolution invoked chapter 8 of title 5 — the Congressional Review Act — and, once signed, voided the order as if it had never been issued. Because of the "substantially the same" bar, the agency cannot reissue that withdrawal without new congressional authorization. Our full analysis walks through what the order had done and what the disapproval changed: the BLM mining ban reversal.
Drafted from primary source documents by LegislationPatch's automated research pipeline, then reviewed, verified, and edited by James Shearn, Editor. Every figure and citation is checked against the official text before publication. See our editorial standards and AI disclosure.