Process Gas Consumers Group v. Consumer Energy Council of America

Background

Several appeals arose from disputes over congressional "legislative veto" provisions that could nullify agency rules. The challenges involved the Natural Gas Policy Act’s one‑House veto tied to a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) pricing rule and the Federal Trade Commission Improvements Act’s two‑House veto tied to FTC trade regulation rules. The NGPA had created a phased, incremental pricing experiment and authorized FERC to propose expansions that would become effective unless disapproved by either House. Lower federal courts struck these veto provisions as unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court affirmed those judgments in the consolidated appeals.

Reasoning

The core question was whether Congress can use one‑House or two‑House vetoes to stop agency rulemaking. Citing the Court’s recent decision in INS v. Chadha, the Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ invalidation of the NGPA and FTC veto provisions, concluding those legislative veto devices cannot constitutionally nullify agency rules. The Supreme Court left the lower courts’ judgments standing, so the challenged veto mechanisms do not operate as a means to block the cited agency rules.

Real world impact

The decision changes how Congress can check independent agencies, reducing the use of single‑House or two‑House devices to overturn rules. Agencies such as FERC and the FTC can proceed under their statutory rulemaking authorities without being subject to those specific vetoes. The ruling may remove a congressional tool that had been used to observe, review, and potentially reverse agency rulemaking under statutes like the NGPA and the FTC Act.

Dissents or concurrances

Justice White dissented, arguing that legislative vetoes were a practical and constitutional method for Congress to retain control over independent agencies, warning that invalidation makes agencies effectively a separate, less accountable branch and raising severability concerns for the NGPA.