HR3766-119

Reported

To prohibit the District of Columbia from requiring tribunals in court or administrative proceedings in the District of Columbia to defer to the Mayor of the District of Columbia's interpretation of statutes and regulations, and for other purposes.

119th Congress Introduced Jun 5, 2025

Summary

What This Bill Does

This bill bars the District of Columbia from requiring a reviewing tribunal to defer to the Mayor of the District of Columbia or a District agency when reviewing an order, decision, or rule in a District court or administrative proceeding. The prohibition covers agency interpretations of statutes or regulations administered by the Mayor or the agency. The reported text repeals the Review of Agency Action Clarification Amendment Act of 2025, while the introduced text referred to the temporary 2024 version, and restores or revives any law that the repealed District Act had amended or repealed. The practical effect is to make District tribunals decide statutory and regulatory meaning without mandatory deference to the Mayor or District agencies.

Who Benefits and How

Parties challenging District agency decisions benefit because tribunals cannot be required to favor the Mayor's or agency's interpretation. District-regulated businesses benefit from a lower deference barrier when contesting agency orders, rules, or statutory interpretations. District residents in administrative proceedings benefit from more independent tribunal review of agency interpretations. Administrative-law attorneys benefit from clearer Federal limits on District deference rules. Reviewing courts and administrative tribunals benefit from authority to interpret statutes and regulations without a mandatory deference rule.

Who Bears the Burden and How

The Mayor of the District of Columbia loses a deference advantage in judicial and administrative review. District agencies must defend statutory and regulatory interpretations without mandatory tribunal deference. The District Council's Review of Agency Action Clarification Amendment Act of 2025 is repealed, and its changes are undone. District administrative tribunals must adjust review standards and restore prior law. Agency enforcement offices may face more litigation risk when regulated parties challenge orders or rules.

Key Provisions

  • Prohibits District tribunals from being required to defer to the Mayor's interpretation of statutes or regulations.
  • Prohibits required deference to District agency interpretations in court and administrative proceedings.
  • Applies the prohibition to review of orders, decisions, and rules.
  • Repeals the District Review of Agency Action Clarification Amendment Act of 2025.
  • Restores or revives District law as if the repealed deference Act had not been enacted.

Evidence Chain:

This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.

At a Glance

What This Bill Does

Prohibits the District of Columbia from requiring courts or administrative tribunals to defer to the Mayor's or a District agency's interpretation of statutes or regulations, and repeals the District law that created that deference rule so prior law is restored.

Key Policy Areas

District of Columbia, Administrative Law, Judicial Review

Primary Purpose

Prohibits the District of Columbia from requiring courts or administrative tribunals to defer to the Mayor's or a District agency's interpretation of statutes or regulations, and repeals the District law that created that deference rule so prior law is restored.

Policy Domains

District of Columbia Administrative Law Judicial Review

House resolution provisions

Identified Gains
  • Parties challenging District agency decisions
  • District-regulated businesses
  • District residents in administrative proceedings
  • Administrative-law attorneys
  • Reviewing courts
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: rh
Reviewing courts: ,
Administrative-law attorneys: ,
District-regulated businesses: ,
Parties challenging District agency decisions: ,
District residents in administrative proceedings: ,
Identified Costs
  • Mayor of the District of Columbia
  • District agencies
  • District Council
  • District administrative tribunals
  • Agency enforcement offices
Model: codex-gpt-5 | Version: bill_summary_v2 | Source: rh
District Council: ,
District agencies: ,
Agency enforcement offices: ,
District administrative tribunals: ,
Mayor of the District of Columbia: ,

Legislative Progress

Reported
Introduced Committee Passed
May 13, 2026

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 565.

May 13, 2026

Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. …

May 13, 2026

Additional sponsor: Mr. Fitzgerald

May 13, 2026

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 565.

Dec 2, 2025

Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: …

Dec 2, 2025

Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held

Jun 5, 2025

Introduced in House

Jun 5, 2025

Referred to the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.

Jun 5, 2025

Ms. Hageman introduced the following bill; which was referred to …

Stakeholder Effects

cui bono?

How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.

Government
9 mentions across 3 clauses
-9 negative

District administrative tribunals, District agencies, Mayor of the District of Columbia

Professional Services
6 mentions across 3 clauses
+6 positive

District residents in administrative proceedings, Parties challenging District agency decisions

Business Regulation
3 mentions across 3 clauses
+3 positive

District-regulated businesses

1/1
sections analyzed
Full impact breakdown

Bill Structure & Actor Mappings

Who is "The Secretary" in each section?

Domains
District of Columbia Administrative Law Judicial Review
Actor Mappings
"mayor"
→ Mayor of the District of Columbia
"district_agencies"
→ District of Columbia agencies

We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.

Learn more about our methodology