Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2025: Courts Get Final Say on Agency Rules, Starting Now

The Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2025, or "SOPRA," makes a significant change to how courts review actions by federal agencies. The core change? Courts are now required to decide all legal questions from scratch—including what laws and agency rules actually mean—whenever they review an agency's action. This is a big shift from the previous practice where courts often deferred to an agency's interpretation, provided it was 'reasonable'.

Rewriting the Rules of Review

This act amends Section 706 of title 5, United States Code, and essentially tells judges to take a fresh look at every legal question in a case challenging an agency decision. They can't just say, "The agency's interpretation seems reasonable." They have to decide for themselves what the law means, as if the question had never been asked before. This applies across the board to any judicial review of an agency action, unless a law specifically exempts itself by referencing this exact section of SOPRA (Section 2).

Real-World Rollout: What It Means for You

Imagine a small business owner facing a new environmental regulation. Previously, if the regulation was challenged, the court might have sided with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) if their interpretation of the underlying law seemed reasonable. Now, the court has to decide the correct interpretation, regardless of the EPA's view. Or consider a contractor dealing with new safety rules from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). The court will now independently determine if OSHA's interpretation of its governing statutes is legally correct, potentially leading to different outcomes than before.

The Potential Pitfalls

While the intention may be to ensure agencies don't overstep, this change could bring some practical headaches. Agencies are staffed with experts in their fields, and their interpretations often reflect that expertise. By requiring de novo review (meaning 'from the new'), courts might end up substituting their judgment for that of specialists. This could lead to less predictable, and potentially less effective, regulation. It could also mean more lawsuits, as businesses or individuals see a greater chance of overturning agency decisions in court. And because different courts might reach different conclusions, we could see inconsistent application of laws across the country.

The Bigger Picture

This law fundamentally shifts the balance of power between agencies and the judiciary. It positions courts as the ultimate arbiters of legal meaning, potentially at the expense of agency expertise and efficiency. The broad application—covering nearly all agency actions—means its impact will likely be felt across many sectors, from environmental protection to workplace safety to financial regulation. The only way out for an agency is if Congress passes a future law specifically saying that SOPRA doesn't apply, which adds another layer of complexity.