Us Congress Senate Bill SJR57

Us Congress 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/9/25
• Refer: 6/9/25

Caption

A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Trade Commission relating to "Negative Option Rule".

Impact

Should SJR57 pass, the resolution would effectively nullify the enforcement of the Negative Option Rule, allowing businesses greater leeway in their marketing strategies without the constraints imposed by the FTC's regulations. Proponents of the resolution argue that these regulations are overly burdensome and impede business practices. They contend that disallowing the rule will encourage innovation and allow companies to operate more freely. However, this stance raises concerns regarding consumer protections, as critics argue that it may lead to an increase in deceptive marketing practices where consumers may inadvertently incur costs or subscriptions.

Summary

SJR57 is a joint resolution that seeks to disapprove a specific rule established by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) known as the 'Negative Option Rule'. This rule, published in the Federal Register on November 15, 2024, was intended to regulate the practices surrounding negative option marketing, where consumers are automatically enrolled in a service or subscription unless they take steps to opt out. This bill represents a legislative move to prevent the enforcement of this FTC rule, reflecting a broader discussion on consumer rights and marketing practices.

Contention

The primary contention surrounding SJR57 lies in the balance between consumer protection and regulatory oversight versus the need for businesses to operate without excessive regulation. Supporters of the resolution stress the importance of a less restrictive regulatory environment for businesses, while opponents caution that this could lead to consumer exploitation. The debate encapsulates wider themes of government oversight in market operations and consumer rights, prompting discussions about how best to protect consumers in an increasingly complex marketplace.