Talk:Congressional Review Act

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Net neutrality in the United States#Under the Trump administration (2017–2020)|Restoring Internet Freedom]] The anchor (#Under the Trump administration (2017–2020)) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Midnight Rule Relief Act[edit]

Per http://thehill.com/regulation/306564-house-passes-bill-targeting-midnight-obama-regs the Midnight Rule Relief Act amended the Congressional Review Act. Should this article reflect that? --Guy Macon (talk) 06:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This act was only passed by the House. It was never passed by the Senate, and it did not become law. 107.145.77.108 (talk) 18:14, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Examples of Joint Resolutions[edit]

Would it be helpful to reorganize this section into a table format that could include at a glance dates, vote counts, outcomes, etc.? 107.145.77.108 (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

S. 496[edit]

Is S. 496 considered a CRA resolution even though it is not a joint resolution? If so, should we add it to the tables? JocularJellyfish (talk) 21:58, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I was just about to ask the same question here. It repeals an Obama Administration regulation created on December 20, 2016. --1990'sguy (talk) 01:32, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think the answer is no, it is not a CRA resolution. For at least three reasons: (1) it's not a joint resolution, and every other instance has been; (2) the text of the resolution does not invoke the CRA for its authority, like every CRA joint resolution I've seen (and I've read most of them); (3) what the text actually claims to do is not repeal the rule, but rather declare it to "have no force or effect" which seems to be something different. So I would not include it in this article in any way. LacrimosaDiesIlla (talk) 02:52, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Congressional Review Act. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150402230759/http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL30116_20080508.pdf to http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/RL30116_20080508.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pending CRA[edit]

Doesn't the US Congress have a pending CRA (Senate Democrats held a news conference to unveil a Congressional Review Act resolution to “roll back the 1332 waiver rule, another Trump administration effort to sabotage Americans' health care by pushing junk plans that lack protections for people with pre-existing conditions.)? MaynardClark (talk) 16:55, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]