Executive Orders
EO 14298 Modifying Reciprocal Tariff Rates To Reflect Discussions With the People’s Republic of China
Reduces the reciprocal tariff rate on Chinese goods from 125% to 10%. This adjustment follows recent discussions between the United States and China aimed at addressing trade imbalances and improving economic relations. The order also maintains additional duties on certain products related to national security concerns.
US Congress
H.J.Res.75 Disapproving the DOE’s Commercial Refrigeration Rule
Introduced by Rep. Debbie Lesko, this resolution nullifies a Department of Energy rule finalized in January 2025 that set new energy conservation standards for commercial refrigeration equipment. Congress rejected the rule on the grounds that it imposed excessive regulatory burdens on small businesses and manufacturers.
H.J.Res.42 Disapproving the Appliance Labeling and Certification Rule
Introduced by Rep. Richard Hudson, this resolution repeals an October 2024 Department of Energy rule regarding certification, labeling, and enforcement of appliance efficiency standards. Lawmakers criticized the rule as federal overreach and unnecessary regulation on consumer goods.
H.J.Res.24 Disapproving the Walk-In Cooler Efficiency Rule
Introduced by Rep. Andrew Clyde, this resolution overturns a Department of Energy rule issued in December 2024 that would have required stricter energy standards for walk-in coolers and freezers. Opponents argued the rule would increase costs for small businesses with minimal environmental benefit.
H.J.Res.20 Disapproving the Gas Water Heater Rule
Introduced by Rep. Diana Harshbarger, this resolution nullifies a DOE rule from December 2024 that set new energy conservation standards for consumer gas-fired instantaneous water heaters. Supporters of the resolution claimed the rule would drive up appliance costs and reduce consumer choice.
S.J.Res.28 Disapproving the CFPB Digital Payment Oversight Rule
Introduced by Senator John Kennedy, this resolution blocks a CFPB rule finalized in December 2024 that sought to expand supervision over large digital payment platforms. Lawmakers opposing the rule cited concerns about stifling fintech innovation and regulatory overreach.
S.J.Res.18 Disapproving the CFPB Overdraft Fee Rule
Also introduced by Senator John Kennedy, this resolution nullifies a December 2024 rule from the CFPB that imposed stricter limits on overdraft fees at large financial institutions. Critics argued the rule could reduce access to short-term credit and disrupt banking operations.
S.146 The TAKE IT DOWN Act
Introduced by Senator Ted Cruz and now enacted as Public Law No. 119-12, mandates that online platforms promptly remove images and videos containing sexually explicit content or deepfakes posted without the subject’s consent. Aimed at combating non-consensual pornography and digital impersonation, the law strengthens protections for victims by requiring platforms to take swift action upon receiving verified takedown requests.
SCOTUS
OK Charter School Board v. Drummond
In a 4-4 split decision, the Supreme Court upheld the Oklahoma Supreme Court’s ruling that blocked public funding for St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual School, which aimed to become the nation’s first publicly funded religious charter school. Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself, leading to the tie that leaves the lower court’s decision intact but without setting a national precedent. The case centered on whether state funding of a religious charter school violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The Court’s deadlock maintains the requirement that public charter schools remain secular institutions.
Kousisis v. United States
The Supreme Court unanimously upheld the wire fraud conviction of government contractor Stamatios Kousisis and his company, Alpha Painting & Construction, affirming that a defendant can be convicted of wire fraud even if the victim does not suffer an economic loss. Justice Amy Coney Barrett, writing for the Court, clarified that under the federal wire fraud statute, it is sufficient that the defendant engaged in deception with the intent to obtain money or property, regardless of whether the victim incurred a financial loss. This decision broadens the scope of wire fraud liability and emphasizes the importance of truthful representations in business dealings.
