Document Type



Harvard Law Review




Several administrative programs contain provisions allowing Congress to veto agency rules, and there is now a bill before Congress to extend this veto power to all agency rulemaking. In this Article, Professor Bruff and Dean Gellhorn analyze the histories of five federal programs subject to the legislative veto to determine the effect of the veto on the rulemaking process and on the relationships between the branches of government. Extrapolating from this practical experience, they suggest that a general legislative veto is unlikely to increase the overall efficiency of the administrative process, may impede the achievement of reasoned decisionmaking based on a record, and may encourage violation of the principle of separation of powers, the doctrine of limited delegation of congressional authority, and emerging concepts of due process in administrative law.


"This Article is based on a report prepared for the Administrative Conference of the United States. The Conference, however, has not approved the Article, and the authors have sole responsibility for it."