On May 9, the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska dismissed a challenge to the constitutionality of the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Congress enacted the CRA in 1996, granting the Congress the power both to review a new regulation issued by a federal agency and to preclude future regulations on the same topic as the overruled regulation. Before President Donald Trump assumed office, Congress had invoked the CRA only once. The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) filed a lawsuit challenging Congress’ use of the CRA to invalidate a 2016 rule issue by the Department of the Interior that prohibited certain hunting and fishing practices on national wildlife refuges in Alaska. CBD alleged that both the CRA’s disapproval provision, which provides that a “disapproved” rule will not take effect, and its reenactment provision, which bars future rules in “substantially the same form” as a disapproved rule, violate the separation of powers between the legislative and executive branches. U.S. District Judge Sharon L. Gleason dismissed the lawsuit, holding that while the group had standing to challenge the CRA’s disapproval provision, it did not have standing to challenge the CRA’s reenactment provision. However, even under the disapproval provision, Judge Gleason said the group’s constitutional claims failed to allege a plausible basis for relief and therefore could not proceed. Congress has issued more than a dozen resolutions repealing rules under the CRA since President Trump took office