News & Insights

Weeks ahead of the inauguration, manufacturers provided the Trump administration with a list of several dozen regulations that should be reconsidered or rescinded to protect manufacturers’ competitiveness. This list covered everything from power plant regulations to employment rules, and some of its recommendations have already been enacted—such as the revocation of the ban on liquefied natural gas exports, which President Trump ordered on Monday.

But signing executive orders is not enough to right-size the regulatory state and remove restrictions on manufacturers’ growth—in general, final agency rules can only be amended through notice-and-comment rulemaking. What does the administration need to do to make this rollback stick?

NAM Chief Legal Officer Linda Kelly spoke to us about the policy and legal landscape that the new administration will have to navigate.

The long term: “Manufacturers need these regulatory changes to withstand the test of time—and legal scrutiny,” said Kelly. Any changes to regulatory policy will be met with legal challenges, which will delay their benefits for manufacturers.

• The new administration needs to do everything by the book and carefully follow recent pronouncements in administrative law, or its policies will not survive, Kelly warned.
• Conducting robust cost-benefit analysis, soliciting public input and tying its actions to congressional mandates will all help the administration make its policies stick, she advised.

The legal hurdles: The big developments overshadowing this round of regulatory reform include the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision, which freed courts from deferring to agencies’ interpretations of statutes. Instead, the courts themselves must decide on the “best reading of a statute.”

• When the Trump administration faces judges skeptical of regulatory rollbacks and no longer obligated to defer to agency interpretation, they must come armed with well-reasoned justifications supported by data and informed by the expertise of the regulated public.
• In many cases, the NAM can provide this expertise and crucial data through the rulemaking process, and the NAM Legal Center can help defend pro-manufacturing policies by intervening in litigation and filing amicus briefs.

Agencies in need: Another new requirement for the administration emerged from Ohio v. EPA, which strengthened the requirement that agencies meaningfully respond to objections to proposed rules raised during public comment periods.

• Here again, manufacturers will play a crucial role, said Kelly, offering agencies the evidence they need to support their policymaking.

The last word: “The Trump administration has to do its homework on the front end,” said Kelly, to survive the inevitable legal challenge that will follow its regulatory changes. “Manufacturers and the NAM Legal Center stand ready to help create a court-durable regulatory environment that enables innovation and prosperity.”