A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement relating to "Restoration of Names That Honor American Greatness; Gulf of America".
- Sponsor
- Sen. Whitehouse, Sheldon [D-RI]
- Committees
- Energy and Natural Resources Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Oct 28, 2025
Bottom line
S.J. Res. 93 is a legislative attempt to block a specific BSEE rule concerning the naming conventions for geographic features, likely related to offshore areas, using the expedited procedures of the Congressional Review Act.
What it actually does
This joint resolution invokes the Congressional Review Act (CRA) to nullify a rule issued by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) on September 15, 2025. The rule, titled "Restoration of Names That Honor American Greatness; Gulf of America," would be prevented from taking effect, and BSEE would be barred from issuing a substantially similar rule in the future without specific congressional authorization.
Proponents argue
Proponents of this resolution (disapproving the BSEE rule) would argue that the BSEE rule represents an inappropriate or politically motivated change to established naming conventions, or that it undermines environmental or safety considerations by prioritizing symbolic gestures over substantive regulatory work. They might contend that the rule's content is detrimental to public interest or deviates from the agency's core mission.
Opponents contend
Opponents of this resolution (i.e., proponents of the BSEE rule) would argue that the BSEE rule itself is a necessary and appropriate action to restore names that reflect American heritage or values, as suggested by its title "Restoration of Names That Honor American Greatness; Gulf of America." They would likely view this resolution as an overreach of congressional authority, hindering an executive agency's legitimate administrative actions.
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 BSEE Rule on Naming Conventions
This section explicitly states that Congress disapproves of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) titled "Restoration of Names That Honor American Greatness; Gulf of America," which was published in the Federal Register on September 15, 2025. By disapproving this rule, the joint resolution ensures that the BSEE rule will not take effect and will have no legal standing. Furthermore, under the Congressional Review Act, BSEE would be prohibited from issuing a new rule that is "substantially the same" as the disapproved rule, unless specifically authorized by a future act of Congress.
Supporters argue
Supporters of this disapproval argue that the BSEE rule is an inappropriate use of agency power, potentially politically motivated, or that the "restoration of names" it proposes is not in the public interest or conflicts with other priorities. They may believe the rule's content is trivial or distracting from more pressing regulatory concerns.
Critics contend
Opponents of this disapproval (i.e., those who support the BSEE rule) would contend that the rule is a legitimate exercise of BSEE's authority to manage offshore areas, including their nomenclature. They would argue that the rule serves to honor American history or values, and that congressional interference through the CRA is an overreach that undermines executive branch functions.
Tradeoffs
The resolution highlights a tension between executive agency autonomy in setting administrative rules and congressional oversight through the CRA. It also reflects a potential policy disagreement over the symbolic importance and practical implications of naming conventions for geographic features, particularly in areas managed by BSEE.
The resolution's effect extends beyond merely nullifying the specific rule; it also prevents the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) from issuing a "substantially similar" rule in the future without explicit congressional authorization.
Section 1
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for CRA resolutions; the full implications are derived from the referenced statute rather than being reiterated in the resolution itself. It is not evasive, but relies on statutory context.
Case for: Proponents of the CRA argue this "look-alike" prohibition is essential to prevent agencies from simply reissuing disapproved rules with minor tweaks, ensuring congressional intent is respected. It provides a strong check on executive overreach.
Case against: Critics argue this prohibition can be overly restrictive, preventing agencies from adapting to new information or circumstances, and effectively freezing policy in an area without requiring Congress to pass new affirmative legislation.
Estimated impact: This provision significantly limits BSEE's future regulatory flexibility regarding the specific naming conventions addressed by the disapproved rule, potentially for an indefinite period.