Trump’s new method to kill the regulations: Because I say that

President Trump has directed 10 federal agencies – including the Environmental Protection Agency, the Ministry of Energy and the Nuclear Organization Committee – To implement a new procedure To cancel a wide range of long energy and environment regulations.

He told agencies that overseeing everything from gas pipelines to power plants to include the provisions of “sunset” that may cause the validity of the regulations automatically by October 2026. If the agencies want to maintain the base, they can only be extended for a maximum of five years at a maximum at one time.

Experts say the guidance faces tremendous legal obstacles. But it was one of three executive orders from Mr. Trump on Wednesday, in which he announced that he was following new shortcuts to weaken or eliminate regulations.

in Another orderA retreat from the federal rules that limit the flow of water in the bathroom heads with a very unusual legal justification: because I say that.

“The notice and comment is unnecessary because I am asking for cancellation,” said Trump’s order.

Legal experts described this amazing sentence, unlike contracts of federal law. 1946 Administrative procedures law Federal agencies are required to go through a lengthy “notice and comment” process when issuing, reviewing or canceling the main rules, giving the public an opportunity for weight. Agencies do not follow these procedures often find their actions prohibited by the courts.

“In her face, all this is completely illegal,” said Judy Freeman, director of the Energy and Energy Law Program at Harvard Law Faculty. A former White House official during the era of President Barack Obama. “Either the real lawyers have left the building or they do not care and want to take a pilot in all these cases and know if the courts will bite.”

The regulatory process is often criticized as tired and long, and the idea of ​​allowing all government regulations ends periodically in conservative circles for years. Known as Zero -based regulatory budget, It has evolved on the budget -based financial budget, a system that has been built a budget of zero every year instead of bearing the amounts of historical spending.

The idea may have got a recent boost from Elon Musk, billionaire advisor to Mr. Trump. Mr. Musk said in a Publicity In February on its social media website, X.

Mr. Musk added: “We just have to clean the spring to the organization and remove the government from the emergence of ordinary Americans so that people can accomplish matters.”

The number of regulations that will affect the arrangement of the sunset will affect. Legal experts indicated that the executive order says that “it does not apply to the authorized regulatory permits systems under the statute”, which describes most of the main regulations funded by laws such as clean air law, clean water law and endangered species.

“This is a huge vulnerability that can make the rest of the system completely ineffective,” said Michael Gerard, director of the Sabine Climate Change Center at the University of Colombia. “Most environmental laws seem to be under this category.”

“The president is right to ensure that the Americans are not full of a country that overcomes US energy and an unconstitutional competitive ability or inconsistent with federal law,” White House spokeswoman Taylor Rogers said in a statement.

In another order, entitled “Directing the abolition of illegal regulationsMr. Trump gave the Cabinet Secretaries 60 days to determine the federal rules that they considered illegal and set plans to cancel them. The matter stated that the agency’s heads can go beyond the process of notification and trip by taking advantage of an exception that experts say is usually dedicated to emergency situations.

However, legal experts said that the laws written by Congress that govern how federal agencies can get rid of the regulations very strict.

Usually, when a federal agency such as the Environmental Protection Agency issues or the regulation changes, it first publishes a proposed base and gives the general time to comment. Then the agency officials read the comments and respond to them, and to provide detailed evidence to support the changes they wish to make and show that they had public concerns. Then, the agency publishes the final rule.

Ms. Freeman said: “The Administrative Procedures Law is a boring law that no one is interested in it, but we deal with it in the legal profession as essential.” “He tells the federal government that it is necessary to do things deliberately, take general inputs and defend its actions as rational. He promised that the government cannot be arbitrary.”

there Specific conditions Where the agency may be able to overcome certain steps. If, for example, emergency regulations need to be released on the safety of aircraft.

But it seems that the Trump administration is pushing to use this exception, which is called a good issue to cancel a wider set of federal rules.

In the past, the courts had no great patience when federal agencies tried to avoid the organizational process. During the first period of Mr. Trump, officials sometimes announced that they had only surveyed a list to be reflected by the courts because they have taken important steps. The administration has lost 76 percent of cases where its environmental policies were challenged, which is a much higher loss rate than previous departments, according to a database maintained by New York University Political Safety Institute.

This time, Trump administration officials may hope that the courts will be more sympathetic. With three judges in the Supreme Court appointed by Mr. Trump, the court now has a conservative superpower that showed Deep doubts about environmental organization.

In some cases, management procedures can be legally defense. For example, in moving to cancel the borders on the flow of water in the shower, Mr. Trump called for redefining the “head of the shower”. In this case, the White House can try to say that it eliminates something called an explanatory base, rather than the main organization, and does not need to pass through the same legal procedures. But the experts said, the agencies cannot argue that they are allowed to overcome these steps just because Mr. Trump said that.

“It is possible that the notification and comment are unnecessary,” said Jonathan Adler, a conservative legal researcher at the University of Kis Western Reserve. “It is not because Trump asks for cancellation, but because if the only thing that is canceled is a definition, there is a matter of whether it is an explanatory rule.”

Some say that Mr. Trump’s plan to allow regulations to end every five years may make it difficult for companies to plan for the future.

Ary Peskoy, director of the Harvard Law Faculty at Harvard Law Faculty, said that the Federal Energy Regulatory Committee, for example, has rules on everything from transportation lines to utility accounting. In theory, the new arrangement requires them to end its validity periodically.

“The first section of this matter talks about how companies need certainty,” said Lisa Henterling, a professor of law at Georgetown University. “But the entire system is a recipe for permanent certainty.”