Citizens for Constitutional v. United States

Appellate Case: 21-1317 Document: 010110795646 Date Filed: 01/10/2023 Page: 1 FILED United States Court of Appeals PUBLISH Tenth Circuit UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS January 10, 2023 Christopher M. Wolpert FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT Clerk of Court _________________________________ CITIZENS FOR CONSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY; SOUTHWEST ADVOCATES, INC., Plaintiffs - Appellants, No. 21-1317 v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; THE OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT; DEBRA HAALAND, in her official capacity as Secretary of the Department of the Interior; GLENDA OWENS, in her official capacity as Acting Director of the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement; KATE MACGREGOR, in her official capacity as Acting Assistant Secretary for Land and Minerals Management, Defendants - Appellees. _________________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado (D.C. No. 1:20-CV-03668-RM-STV) _________________________________ Jared S. Pettinato, The Pettinato Firm, Washington, D.C., for Plaintiffs - Appellants. Martin Totaro, Attorney, Appellate Staff, Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice (Brian M. Boynton, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Cole Finegan, U.S. Attorney, Michael S. Raab and Benjamin M. Shultz, Attorneys, Appellate Staff, Civil Division, with him on the brief), Washington, D.C., for Defendants - Appellees. _________________________________ Appellate Case: 21-1317 Document: 010110795646 Date Filed: 01/10/2023 Page: 2 Before HOLMES, Chief Judge, MURPHY, and HARTZ, Circuit Judges. _________________________________ HARTZ, Circuit Judge. _________________________________ Plaintiffs Citizens for Constitutional Integrity and Southwest Advocates, Inc. appeal the rejection of their challenges to the constitutionality of the Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 801–08 (the CRA or the Act), and Senate Rule XXII, the so- called Cloture Rule, which requires the votes of three-fifths of the Senate to halt debate. We reject their challenges to the CRA and hold that they lack standing to challenge the Cloture Rule. The CRA was enacted in 1996 to enhance congressional oversight of executive rulemaking. Among other things, it creates an expedited process through which Congress can repeal rules promulgated by federal agencies. Under the Act a rule “shall not take effect (or continue), if the Congress enacts a joint resolution of disapproval, described under section 802, of the rule.” 5 U.S.C. § 801(b)(1). (A joint resolution is effectively the same as a bill except in the context of proposing constitutional amendments. 1) After it is passed by Congress, a joint resolution of disapproval must 1 “Congress legislates through ‘acts’ and ‘joint resolutions.’ Resolutions are recognized in the Constitution, and a joint resolution is a bill within the meaning of the congressional rules and the processes of the Congress. With the exception of joint resolutions proposing amendments to the Constitution, all such resolutions are sent to the President for approval and have the full force of law.” Int’l Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. Wash. Terminal Co., 473 F.2d 1156, 1163 (D.C. Cir. 1972); accord Nuclear Energy Inst., Inc. v. EPA, 373 F.3d 1251, 1301, 1309 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (per curiam) (“There is no question that [a joint] [r]esolution is a law, enacted in accordance with the bicameralism and presentment requirements of Article I, section 7, clause 3 of the …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals