Bill · S.J.Res. 28· Senate(119-SJRES-28)
A joint resolution disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications".
- Introduced
- 2/27/2025
- Last activity
- 5/9/2025 — Became Public Law No: 119-11.
- Sponsored by
- Pete Ricketts
- Cosponsors
- - 5 - 0
- Introduced
- Passed Senate
- Passed House
- To President
- Became Law
What this bill would do
This is a joint resolution from the 119th Congress. It expresses disapproval of a specific final rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. The rule is titled ``Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications''. By passing this resolution, Congress intends for that rule to have no force or effect.
Yes
No question was scored yes.
The opposite
Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices?-5
The resolution nullifies a Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection rule intended to define larger participants in digital payment markets, which could reduce oversight and consumer protections.
Does this give the federal government more power?-3
The resolution limits the regulatory authority of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection by nullifying its recently submitted rule.
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?-2
By nullifying consumer financial protection rules, the resolution may reduce protections for lower-income individuals using digital payment applications.
What Congress actually voted on
3 recorded votes have been taken on this bill. 2 of them decided something; the rest moved it along.
- The Senate: the vote on whether to pass the joint resolutionJoint Resolution Passed 51–47
A joint resolution is a bill by another name: it goes to the other chamber and then to the President. Most of them are used to overturn a rule an agency has made.
03/05/2025 · Roll call 106 · recorded as “On the Joint Resolution S.J.Res. 28”
- The House: the vote on whether to pass the billPassed 219–211
This is the real decision in this chamber. Passing here sends the bill to the other chamber, which must pass it too before it can go to the President.
04/09/2025 · Roll call 95 · recorded as “On Passage”
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
- Nullification of the Bureau's Rule: By disapproving the rule, the resolution ensures the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection regarding ``Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications'' shall have no force or effect. This prevents the implementation of the rule described in 89 Fed. Reg. 99582 (December 10, 2024).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No information provided: The provided text does not contain any details regarding the specific contents or potential burdens of the original rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. Therefore, no negative impacts can be identified from the text provided.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Economy And Finance
- Improves Consumer Protection-5
- Governance And Ideology
- Increases Federal Power-3
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Good For Low Income Households-2
- Public Law(5/10/2025)
The text as it became law
- Enrolled Bill
The final version, on its way to the President
- 5/9/2025
- Signed by President.
- Became Public Law No: 119-11.
- 5/5/2025
- Presented to President.
- 4/9/2025
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 219 - 211 (Roll no. 95). (text: CR H1514: 2)
- On passage Passed by the Yeas and Nays: 219 - 211 (Roll no. 95). (text: CR H1514)
- Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1532-1533)
- POSTPONED PROCEEDINGS - At the conclusion of debate on S.J. Res. 28, the Chair put the question on passage of the joint resolution and by voice vote, announced that the ayes had prevailed. Mr. Hill (AR) demanded the yeas and nays and the Chair postponed further proceedings until a time to be announced.
- The previous question was ordered pursuant to the rule.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with one hour of debate on S.J. Res. 28.
- Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 18, S.J. Res. 28, H.R. 1526 and H.R. 22. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18, and S.J. Res. 28 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 22 and H.R. 1526, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28.
- Considered under the provisions of rule H. Res. 294. (consideration: CR H1514-1519)
- 4/7/2025
- Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 294 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of S.J. Res. 18, S.J. Res. 28, H.R. 1526 and H.R. 22. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18, and S.J. Res. 28 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 22 and H.R. 1526, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28.
- 4/1/2025
- Rule H. Res. 282 failed passage of House.
- Rules Committee Resolution H. Res. 282 Reported to House. Rule provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28. The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 22, H.R. 1526, S.J. Res. 18, and S.J. Res. 28 under a closed rule. The resolution provides for one hour of debate on each measure and one motion to recommit on H.R. 22 and H.R. 1526, and one motion to commit on S.J. Res. 18 and S.J. Res. 28. The resolution also provides that H. Res. 23 and H. Res. 164 are laid on the table.
- 3/10/2025
- Held at the Desk
- Received in the House
- 3/6/2025
- Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- 3/5/2025
- Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1503, S1510-1511, S1520-1521)
- Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 51 - 47. Record Vote Number: 106.
- Passed Senate without amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 51 - 47. Record Vote Number: 106.
- 3/4/2025
- Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs discharged, by petition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802(c).
- Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 20.
- Motion to proceed to consideration of measure agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 50 - 47. Record Vote Number: 103. (CR S1489)
- Measure laid before Senate by motion. (consideration: CR S1489)
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 3/3/2025
- 2 Cosponsors added.
- 2/27/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- Introduced in Senate
3 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
- 119-HJRES-64: Disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications".
- 119-HRES-282: Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions''; providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 28) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to ''Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications''; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1526) to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the authority of district courts to provide injunctive relief, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 22) to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes; and for other purposes.
- 119-HRES-294: Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 18) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Overdraft Lending: Very Large Financial Institutions"; providing for consideration of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 28) disapproving the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to "Defining Larger Participants of a Market for General-Use Digital Consumer Payment Applications"; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1526) to amend title 28, United States Code, to limit the authority of district courts to provide injunctive relief, and for other purposes; providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 22) to amend the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 to require proof of United States citizenship to register an individual to vote in elections for Federal office, and for other purposes; and for other purposes.
Jim BanksRepublican · Indiana
Ted BuddRepublican · North Carolina
Deb FischerRepublican · Nebraska
Bill HagertyRepublican · Tennessee
Tim ScottRepublican · South Carolina