To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act does not include any evidence that the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific principles and methods.

Key Points

• This bill amends the Administrative Procedure Act to let courts strike down federal agency rules if the evidence behind them is not based on reliable scientific principles and methods. This gives judges a new tool to reject regulations they find scientifically unsupported.
• The bill adds a new category to the existing list of reasons a court can set aside an agency action under Section 706(2) of Title 5. Currently, courts can overturn rules that are arbitrary, unconstitutional, or unsupported by substantial evidence. This adds scientific reliability as another legal test.
• If enacted, courts would become the gatekeepers of what counts as reliable science in federal rulemaking. Since judges are not typically trained scientists, this could lead to inconsistent rulings and create new legal challenges to environmental, health, and safety regulations.
• The bill was introduced by Rep. Hageman and referred to the House Judiciary Committee. It applies broadly to all federal agencies, meaning it could affect rules from the EPA, FDA, OSHA, and many other regulatory bodies.