Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Veterans Affairs relating to "Reproductive Health Services".
- Sponsor
- Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26]
- Committees
- Veterans' Affairs Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 27, 2026
Bottom line
H.J. Res. 144 is a Congressional Review Act resolution aiming to overturn a Department of Veterans Affairs rule on reproductive health services, effectively blocking its implementation.
What it actually does
This joint resolution seeks to nullify a specific rule issued by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) concerning "Reproductive Health Services." If enacted, it would prevent the VA rule, published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2025, from taking effect and would prohibit the VA from reissuing a substantially similar rule in the future without specific statutory authorization.
Proponents argue
Proponents of H.J. Res. 144 (i.e., those who support disapproving the VA rule) would argue that the VA exceeded its statutory authority in issuing the rule on reproductive health services, or that the rule itself is an inappropriate expansion of VA services. They might contend that the rule imposes policies that are not aligned with congressional intent or public values, and that Congress, through the CRA, is exercising its oversight responsibility to rein in executive agency overreach.
Opponents contend
Opponents of H.J. Res. 144 (i.e., those who support the VA rule and oppose its disapproval) would argue that the VA rule is essential for ensuring comprehensive healthcare access for veterans, particularly for reproductive health services. They would likely assert that the VA acted within its legal authority to provide necessary medical care to veterans and that disapproving the rule would negatively impact veterans' health and well-being by limiting access to critical services.
The bill text is extremely short and can be read in under a minute, making it highly accessible for immediate understanding of its direct action.
Section 1
Disapproval of VA Rule on Reproductive Health Services
This provision explicitly states that Congress disapproves of the Department of Veterans Affairs rule titled "Reproductive Health Services," which was published in the Federal Register on December 31, 2025 (90 Fed. Reg. 61310). Upon enactment, this resolution would render the VA rule null and void, meaning it would have no legal effect. Furthermore, under the Congressional Review Act, the VA would be prohibited from issuing any new rule that is "substantially the same" as the disapproved rule, unless specifically authorized by a subsequent act of Congress.
Supporters argue
Supporters of the resolution argue that the VA rule oversteps the agency's legal boundaries or introduces policies that are not appropriate for the VA. They contend that Congress has the constitutional authority and responsibility to review and reject executive agency rules that are deemed inconsistent with legislative intent or public policy, and that this resolution is a proper exercise of that oversight.
Critics contend
Opponents of the resolution argue that it undermines the VA's ability to provide comprehensive healthcare to veterans, particularly women veterans, by blocking access to essential reproductive health services. They assert that the VA rule was a necessary measure to ensure equitable care and that its disapproval would create barriers to healthcare for a vulnerable population.
Tradeoffs
The resolution highlights a tension between congressional oversight of executive agencies and the executive branch's authority to interpret and implement laws, particularly concerning healthcare access for veterans. It also reflects broader societal debates over the scope of reproductive health services and the role of government in providing them.
The resolution's disapproval of the VA rule also triggers a provision of the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 801(b)(2)) that prevents the agency from issuing a "new rule that is substantially the same" as the disapproved rule, unless specifically authorized by a subsequent law.
Section 1 (implicit via 5 U.S.C. 801(b)(2))
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for CRA resolutions, as the "substantially the same" prohibition is a statutory consequence, not something that needs to be reiterated in each resolution. It is a feature of the CRA, not an attempt at obfuscation within this specific bill.
Case for: Proponents of the CRA's "substantially the same" clause argue it prevents agencies from simply reissuing disapproved rules with minor cosmetic changes, ensuring that congressional disapproval has lasting effect and truly curbs executive overreach.
Case against: Critics argue that this provision can be overly restrictive, potentially preventing agencies from adapting to new information or circumstances, or from addressing a policy issue through alternative, improved rules, without going through the lengthy process of new legislation.
Estimated impact: This provision significantly limits the VA's future regulatory options regarding the specific "Reproductive Health Services" rule, effectively making the disapproval permanent unless Congress passes new legislation.