Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington have introduced major legislative proposals aimed at reshaping how federal agencies create and defend regulations. The bills respond to concerns that corporate lobbyists, industry funded studies, and prolonged litigation have come to dominate the rulemaking system, limiting the effectiveness of laws enacted by Congress and slowing the adoption of life saving protections.
The first bill, the Experts Protect Effective Rules, Transparency, and Stability Act, or EXPERTS Act, focuses on reversing legal changes that followed the Supreme Court’s decision last year to overturn the Chevron doctrine. For forty years, Chevron required courts to grant broad deference to federal agencies when interpreting congressional statutes in areas demanding scientific and technical expertise. According to its sponsors, codifying the doctrine is essential to restoring stable rulemaking processes.
The legislation would “codify the Chevron doctrine,” reinstating the principle that courts should be broadly deferential to decisions made by independent agencies. The bill also seeks to increase transparency in the rulemaking process by requiring disclosure of funding sources for all “scientific, economic, and technical studies” submitted to influence regulatory decisions. Lawmakers say this step is needed because corporations have routinely submitted studies without revealing the financial interests behind them.
The EXPERTS Act includes additional provisions intended to prevent delays. It would accelerate rulemaking by “excluding private parties from using the negotiated rulemaking process” and by reinstating a six year limit during which outside parties can file legal challenges to agency decisions.
The bill’s sponsors framed the proposal as necessary to counterbalance corporate influence. Jayapal said, “Many Americans are taught in civics classes that Congress passes a law and that’s it, but the reality is that any major legislation enacted must also be implemented and enforced by the executive branch to become a reality.” She argued that “we are seeing the Trump administration dismantle systems created to ensure that federal regulation prioritizes public safety.” She added that “at a time when corporations and CEOs have outsized power, it is critical that we ensure that public interest is protected. This bill will level the playing field to ensure that laws passed actually work for the American people.”
Warren described the legislation as a direct response to growing corporate influence over agencies. She stated that “giant corporations and their armies of lobbyists shouldn’t get to manipulate how our laws are implemented,” and added, “while Donald Trump keeps selling away influence over our government, we’re fighting to ensure the rules are being written to help working Americans, not corporate interests.”
Public Citizen, a major consumer advocacy organization, endorsed the EXPERTS Act. Co president Lisa Gilbert called it “the marquee legislation to improve our regulatory system.” She said, “The bill aims directly at the corporate capture of our rulemaking process, brings transparency to the regulatory review process and imposes a $250,000 fine on corporations that submit false information, among other things.” She emphasized that “The bill is essential law for the future of our health, safety, environment, and workers. Public Citizen urges swift passage in both chambers.”
The second legislative proposal, the Stop Corporate Capture Act, focuses on structural reforms within the rulemaking system itself. Jayapal described the practices the bill targets, noting that “the rulemaking process is how the regulation to enforce those laws is created, but too often it’s driven by corporate lobbyists and special interests who know exactly how to make these processes benefit their bottom lines at the cost of public interest.” She said, “My bill will level the playing field and ensure that laws passed for the people actually work for the people.”
The legislation has drawn support from members of Congress who have long worked on administrative reform. Representative David Cicilline said, “The Stop Corporate Capture Act would make industry and our government more accountable by ensuring that all agency issued rules are based on rigorous studies and free from bias.” He called it “a straightforward, commonsense proposal that puts the American people first” and stated he was “proud to join my friend, Representative Jayapal, in introducing this bill.”
The bill outlines several major changes. It would require full disclosure of who funds scientific, economic, or technical studies submitted during rulemaking. It would also mandate a public explanation when agencies withdraw proposed rules and require public disclosure of any changes to regulatory language during rulemaking. The proposal aims to prevent corporations from shaping regulation behind closed doors by limiting their ability to delay implementation and by accelerating the rulemaking review process.
The Stop Corporate Capture Act also includes significant enforcement provisions designed to give the public more leverage. It would fine corporations that lie to the government about whether a public interest rule would affect shareholders. It would establish an Office of the Public Advocate within the Office of Government Ethics to represent public interests. The bill would create a cause of action allowing citizens to sue corporations that violate rules and to sue agencies for failing to enforce the law. It would also require the government to respond to citizen petitions.
The legislative effort has broad support among progressive Democrats. Co sponsors include Representatives Jesús “Chuy” García, Henry C. Johnson Jr., Barbara Lee, Ted Lieu, Eleanor Holmes Norton, Mary Scanlon, Mark Takano, and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. The bill is also supported by the Coalition on Sensible Safeguards, a collection of organizations advocating for strong regulatory protections.
Jayapal first introduced the Stop Corporate Capture Act in the 117th Congress, where it received a hearing in the House Judiciary Committee. The reintroduction, combined with the rollout of the EXPERTS Act, signals a coordinated push to strengthen agency authority, increase transparency and prevent industry from dominating critical regulatory decisions.
As Congress considers both proposals, supporters argue that these changes would influence rulemaking in areas such as environmental protection, climate policy, workplace safety, health regulations and consumer safeguards. They say that without stronger limits on corporate involvement and restored deference to expert agencies, future regulations will remain vulnerable to delay, political pressure and industry backed studies that obscure scientific findings.
Together, the EXPERTS Act and the Stop Corporate Capture Act aim to ensure that federal laws passed by Congress are implemented through a rulemaking system rooted in expertise, transparency and accountability. Their supporters say these measures are necessary to protect the public interest and reinforce democratic oversight in a regulatory environment where corporations often exert disproportionate influence.
COMMENTS