The 119th Congress in Transition: Post-Shutdown Governance, Surveillance Battles, and the Deregulatory Pivot

Nov 21, 2025

Executive Summary: A Legislature in Flux

The period spanning November 17 through November 21, 2025, on Capitol Hill represented a critical inflection point for the 119th Congress. Emerging from a debilitating 43-day government shutdown—the longest in United States history—the legislative branch did not return to a state of equilibrium. Instead, the cessation of the fiscal standoff merely cleared the stage for a series of intensified ideological, constitutional, and institutional conflicts. Having successfully enacted a "minibus" appropriations package and a Continuing Resolution (CR) on November 12 to secure federal operations through early 2026, lawmakers immediately pivoted to a backlog of explosive issues that effectively redefined the boundaries of congressional privilege, environmental law, and executive transparency.1

This week was characterized by a distinctive duality. On one hand, there was a remarkable, if fleeting, bipartisan consensus on issues of transparency, most notably the decisive passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act. On the other, the chambers were riven by internecine conflict, not only between the erratic partisan factions but between the House and Senate themselves. The dispute over the "Arctic Frost" provision—a legislative liability shield born of the January 6th investigations—exposed deep structural rifts regarding the separation of powers and the immunity of elected officials.3 Simultaneously, the Republican majority mounted a sophisticated and multi-pronged offensive to dismantle the regulatory legacy of the previous administration, utilizing both the Congressional Review Act (CRA) and structural reform legislation like the SPEED Act to aggressively reopen Alaska’s North Slope to energy development and overhaul the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).5

This report provides an exhaustive analysis of these developments. It dissects the legislative mechanics of the post-shutdown landscape, the political calculus driving the ethics wars, the constitutional implications of the surveillance disputes, and the long-term policy trajectories established by the week's energy and personnel votes.

I. The Fiscal Aftermath: Governing by Minibus and the Looming Cliffs

To understand the legislative behavior of the week of November 17, one must first contextualize the fiscal terrain established immediately prior. The resolution of the 43-day shutdown on November 12, 2025, was not a total victory for fiscal order but rather a strategic fragmentation of the budget that has created a bifurcated reality for federal agencies.

The Mechanics of the Restart: The November 12 Statutes

The legislation signed by President Trump to end the shutdown—the Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act, 2026—fundamentally altered the appropriations landscape for the remainder of the 119th Congress. This law was not a simple kick-the-can measure; it was a hybrid vehicle containing both full-year funding and temporary extensions.1

The "Minibus" Components: Stability for Select Sectors

The act enacted three full-year appropriations bills for Fiscal Year 2026 (FY2026), providing budgetary certainty through September 30, 2026, for specific sectors.

• Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration (FDA): By locking in full-year funding for these agencies, Congress stabilized the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), ensuring that food security benefits would not face another disruption in January. It also secured the inspection and review activities of the FDA and rural development programs, critical constituencies for rural Republicans and urban Democrats alike.1
• Military Construction and Veterans Affairs (MilCon-VA): This component was politically essential. It funded Veterans Affairs resources with a specific emphasis on workforce stability following the disruptions of the 43-day closure. It also allowed Military Construction (MILCON) projects to proceed with contract awards, preventing further degradation of defense infrastructure.1
• Legislative Branch: Crucially, Congress fully funded its own operations and those of support agencies (like the Capitol Police and Library of Congress) for the full year. This inclusion often draws cynical observation, but structurally, it ensures that the mechanism of government itself—the legislature—remains operational regardless of future executive branch funding fights.1

The Continuing Resolution (CR): The January 30 Cliff

For the remainder of the federal government—including the Department of Defense, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Department of Justice, and the Department of the Interior—funding was only extended at FY2025 levels through January 30, 2026.1 This created a "tiered" shutdown risk. While veterans and farmers are safe, the military and social safety net programs face another existential deadline in late January.

The Unresolved Crisis: The ACA Subsidy Cliff

A glaring omission in the shutdown deal, which began to dominate policy discussions the week of November 17, was the failure to extend the enhanced subsidies for Affordable Care Act (ACA) health insurance premiums. These subsidies, expanded under previous administrations to lower costs for millions of Americans, are set to expire at the end of the calendar year (December 31, 2025).1

The "minibus" did not address this, creating a "policy cliff" separate from the funding cliff. With the subsidies set to vanish weeks before the government funding expires, Senate leaders indicated a separate vote would be necessary in December. However, the political complexity is high. Republicans are under pressure from the incoming Trump administration to explore alternatives to the ACA structure, such as Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) or direct patient funding mechanisms, as directed by President Trump.2 This sets the stage for a high-stakes healthcare battle in the waning days of 2025, where the expiration of subsidies could be used as leverage for broader structural changes to the healthcare market.

Federal Workforce Implications

The immediate aftermath of the week involved the logistical reintegration of the federal workforce. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) issued guidance ensuring back pay for furloughed employees, a process that began immediately following the November 12 signing. However, the psychological and operational toll of a 43-day hiatus—the longest in history—has created a backlog in agency processing that Congress is now pressuring the administration to clear.1

II. The Transparency Mandate: The Epstein Files and the Politics of Exposure

If the fiscal settlement provided the baseline for the week, the legislative spotlight was stolen by a populist crusade for transparency regarding the late Jeffrey Epstein. This issue, simmering for years, reached a boiling point that forced a rare convergence of the far-left and far-right against the institutional center and the security state.

Legislative History of H.R. 4405

The Epstein Files Transparency Act (H.R. 4405) did not emerge in a vacuum. It was the product of months of agitation by a bipartisan coalition who viewed the Department of Justice’s continued secrecy regarding the Epstein network as a cover-up of elite misconduct. The bill’s primary objective was simple yet sweeping: to strip the DOJ of its discretion to withhold non-classified documents related to the sex trafficker’s investigation.7

The "Discharge Petition" Dynamic

The catalyst for the bill’s sudden movement was a rebellion within the House Republican Conference. Representatives Lauren Boebert (R-CO) and Nancy Mace (R-SC) had threatened to utilize a discharge petition—a parliamentary maneuver that allows a majority of the House to force a bill to the floor over the objection of the Speaker or committee chairs.7 This threat is significant; discharge petitions are rarely successful, but the mere threat of one on an issue with such high public salience (and populist energy) terrified leadership. The prospect of Republicans joining Democrats to force a vote would have been a humiliation for Speaker Mike Johnson.

The Presidential Reversal

The White House initially resisted the legislation, likely due to DOJ concerns about setting precedents for releasing investigative files of closed (or adjacent) cases. However, realizing the inevitability of the floor vote and the political toxicity of opposing transparency regarding a pedophile ring, President Trump reversed course on Sunday, November 16. His declaration that the administration had "nothing to hide" and his labeling of the secrecy as a "Democrat hoax" provided the political cover for the entire GOP conference to support the measure.7

The Mechanics of the Vote

On Tuesday, November 18, the House passed H.R. 4405 by an overwhelming margin of 427-1. The sole dissenting vote was a statistical anomaly in a chamber usually paralyzed by partisanship. The bill was considered under a "suspension of the rules," a procedure requiring a two-thirds majority that is used to expedite non-controversial legislation. That a bill exposing potential corruption among the global elite was deemed "non-controversial" speaks to the sheer ferocity of public pressure.7

The Senate acted with equal speed, passing the measure by unanimous consent on November 19. President Trump signed it into law the same day. The law now mandates the Attorney General to conduct a review and release all documents and records in possession of the DOJ relating to Epstein. The timeline for this release will likely become the next battleground, as the DOJ attempts to redact names of victims and uncharged individuals, while congressional hawks push for maximal disclosure.8

Table 1: Legislative Velocity of H.R. 4405 (Epstein Files Transparency Act)

Milestone	Date	Details	Significance
Presidential Reversal	Nov 16, 2025	Trump endorses release, calling secrecy a "hoax"	Removed Executive Branch opposition barrier.
House Passage	Nov 18, 2025	Vote: 427-1 (Suspension of Rules)	Demonstrated overwhelming populist consensus.
Senate Passage	Nov 19, 2025	Unanimous Consent	bypassed committee delays; signaled Senate alignment.
Enactment	Nov 19, 2025	Signed by President Trump	Starts the clock for DOJ document processing.

III. The Ethics Wars: Censure as a Political Weapon

While H.R. 4405 represented a unified Congress, the weaponization of the information already known about Epstein tore the House apart. The transparency crusade immediately morphed into an ethics battle, targeting specific members for their alleged proximity to the Epstein orbit.

The Failed Censure of Delegate Stacey Plaskett

The primary target was Delegate Stacey Plaskett (D-VI), the non-voting representative from the U.S. Virgin Islands and a former House manager during the second impeachment of Donald Trump. Republicans, led by Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC) and the Freedom Caucus, introduced a privileged resolution to censure Plaskett and strip her of her committee assignments, specifically her seat on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.9

The Allegations: "Coaching" a Witness?

The resolution was predicated on texts revealed in previously released Epstein documents. Rep. Norman alleged that in 2019, Plaskett communicated with Epstein regarding a House Oversight Committee hearing featuring Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former "fixer." The GOP alleged that Epstein, a constituent of Plaskett’s (as he resided in the USVI), had provided input or "coached" Plaskett on lines of questioning to use against Trump’s associate. Norman characterized this as a betrayal of the institution, arguing it was "beyond comprehension" for a member to seek advice from a "predator" regarding official proceedings.9

The Defense and the Floor Dynamics

Plaskett vigorously denied the characterization, arguing the contact was unsolicited or misrepresented and accusing Republicans of hypocrisy. The debate on the floor was vitriolic. Plaskett stated, "I feel sorry for this body," lamenting the descent into personal destruction over legislative substance.11

The vote on the resolution (H. Res. 888) was held late on November 18. It failed by a narrow margin of 209-214.12

• The Coalition of the Unwilling: The resolution failed because a small group of institutionalist Republicans broke ranks. Representatives Don Bacon (R-NE), Lance Gooden (R-TX), and Dave Joyce (R-OH) voted "Nay" alongside all Democrats. Three other Republicans voted "Present."
• The Rationale: These defections suggest a fatigue within the GOP regarding the use of censure. For members like Joyce (who chairs the Ethics Committee) and Bacon, the precedent of removing members from committees based on political interpretations of non-criminal conduct (the texts were not illegal) was likely viewed as a slippery slope that could eventually be turned against Republicans.13

The "Mutually Assured Destruction" (MAD) of Censure

The failure of the Plaskett censure had an immediate cooling effect. Democrats had prepared a retaliatory censure resolution against Rep. Cory Mills (R-FL), based on allegations of stolen valor and financial misconduct. However, following the defeat of the Plaskett measure, Democrats withdrew the Mills resolution. Instead, the House voted to refer the Mills matter to the House Ethics Committee for a formal investigation.11

This sequence illustrates a return to the doctrine of "Mutually Assured Destruction" in House ethics: if one side escalates to floor censures based on external allegations, the other will respond in kind. The retreat to the Ethics Committee suggests a temporary truce, pushing these volatile issues back behind closed doors to allow the chamber to function.

IV. The Constitutional Crisis: "Arctic Frost" and the Separation of Powers

Perhaps the most consequential development of the week—in terms of constitutional law and the balance of power—was the open warfare that erupted between the House and Senate regarding the Department of Justice’s investigation into the 2020 election and January 6th.

Context: Operation Arctic Frost

The conflict originated from a revelation involving Special Counsel Jack Smith’s investigation, known internally as "Arctic Frost." In late 2023 and throughout 2024, it became known that the FBI had subpoenaed the toll records (metadata showing call times, durations, and numbers, but not content) of staff and members of Congress as part of the probe into efforts to overturn the 2020 election results. Targets included Senators like Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), as well as House members.3

For Senate Republicans, this was a violation of the Speech or Debate Clause, which protects legislative activity from executive branch scrutiny. They viewed the secret seizure of data as a "weaponization" of the DOJ against political rivals.

The Senate's Retaliation: The $500,000 Provision

In response, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) successfully inserted a controversial provision into the government funding bill signed on November 12. The language did two things:

1. Mandatory Notification: It required service providers to notify Congress if their data was subpoenaed, limiting the DOJ's ability to use gag orders.
2. Private Right of Action: Most controversially, it created a mechanism for members of Congress to sue the federal government for damages if their data was accessed without this notification. The statutory damages were set at $500,000 per violation, and the law was made retroactive to 2022.4

This effectively meant that Senators investigated by Jack Smith could immediately sue the DOJ and receive massive taxpayer-funded payouts.

The House Revolt: A Unanimous Rebuke

When the details of this "slush fund" (as critics called it) became public, the House revolted. The optics of wealthy Senators voting to give themselves the right to sue taxpayers for half a million dollars were politically toxic. The revolt was led by an unusual alliance: the House Freedom Caucus (e.g., Chip Roy) who despised the "self-dealing," and progressive Democrats who opposed hindering DOJ investigations.15

On Wednesday, November 19, the House voted 427-0 to repeal the provision.3 A unanimous vote in the House is exceedingly rare and serves as a devastating rebuke of the Senate leadership. It signaled that the lower chamber would not tolerate the perception of legislative graft, even under the guise of constitutional protection.

The Senate Stalemate

The repeal bill was sent to the Senate, where it hit a wall. Senator Lindsey Graham blocked a Democratic attempt to pass the repeal by unanimous consent.17 Majority Leader Thune defended the original provision, arguing that the financial penalty was the only way to deter the executive branch from overreach. "The House isn't implicated in what we did," Thune argued, attempting to frame it as a unicameral issue.14

However, the political damage was done. Several Senators, including Marsha Blackburn, publicly stated they would not seek the damages, bowing to public pressure.4 The standoff leaves the provision technically on the books but politically radioactive, creating a lingering tension between the chambers regarding how to check executive power without enriching legislators.

V. Energy Policy I: The Congressional Review Act Blitz

While constitutional battles raged, the Republican majority executed a precise and highly effective strategy to overhaul U.S. energy policy, focusing specifically on unlocking oil and gas resources in Alaska. They utilized the Congressional Review Act (CRA), a legislative tool that allows Congress to overturn federal agency rules with a simple majority vote (bypassing the 60-vote filibuster threshold in the Senate) within a specific window of time.18

The Target: The Biden Conservation Legacy in Alaska

The focus of the attack was two major rules promulgated by the Biden administration's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) that had restricted drilling across millions of acres of the Arctic.

S.J. Res. 80: The National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (NPR-A)

The first target was the BLM’s 2022 rule regarding the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska (NPR-A). The Biden rule had closed approximately 48% of the 23-million-acre reserve to leasing to protect caribou herds and surface resources. Republicans, joined by the Alaskan delegation, argued this violated the 1976 Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act, which mandated the reserve be used for energy production.6

• Senate Action: The resolution had already passed the Senate on October 30, 2025, by a vote of 52-45. Notably, Democratic Senator Jon Tester (MT) and Independent Joe Manchin (WV) voted with Republicans, providing the necessary margin.19
• House Action: On November 18, the House took up the Senate-passed resolution and approved it by a vote of 216-209 (Roll Call 296).12
• Outcome: Having passed both chambers, S.J. Res. 80 was sent to President Trump. His signature will nullify the 2022 rule and prohibit the BLM from issuing a "substantially similar" rule in the future, effectively locking open the NPR-A for development.6

H.J. Res. 131: The Coastal Plain (ANWR)

Simultaneously, the House passed H.J. Res. 131, targeting the Biden administration's restrictions on the "Coastal Plain Oil and Gas Leasing Program" (often associated with the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, or ANWR). The resolution disapproves of the BLM's Record of Decision from December 2024 that limited lease sales.

• House Action: The resolution passed 217-209 (Roll Call 295) on November 18.12
• Implication: This vote signals a wholesale return to the Trump-era policy of aggressive leasing in the refuge, a central plank of the "energy dominance" agenda.

Table 2: The Alaska CRA Campaign (November 2025)

Resolution	Target Rule	Purpose	Vote Tally (House)	Status
S.J. Res. 80	BLM NPR-A Rule (2022)	Reopen 48% of National Petroleum Reserve to drilling	216-209	Passed Congress; To President
H.J. Res. 131	BLM Coastal Plain Leasing (2024)	Restore leasing program in Arctic Refuge (ANWR)	217-209	Passed House; To Senate
S.J. Res. 89	BLM Buffalo Field Office Plan	Overturn restrictions on coal/mining in Wyoming	N/A	Motion to Proceed Agreed in Senate (51-47)

VI. Energy Policy II: Structural Reform and the SPEED Act

Complementing the targeted strikes of the CRA was a broader, structural effort to reform the federal permitting process. On Thursday, November 20, the House Natural Resources Committee advanced the Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development (SPEED) Act (H.R. 4776), marking the most significant attempt to amend the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in the 119th Congress.5

The Architecture of H.R. 4776

Authored by Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman (R-AR), the SPEED Act is designed to accelerate infrastructure projects—from mines to transmission lines—by reducing the litigation and bureaucratic hurdles mandated by NEPA.24

Key Provisions:

• Judicial Review Reform: The bill drastically reduces the statute of limitations for filing lawsuits against issued permits. It proposes shortening the window from six years to as few as 150 days (less than one year). This is intended to give developers certainty that a project will not be halted by litigation years after approval.25
• Binding Permitting Decisions: It prohibits federal agencies from rescinding, withdrawing, or amending a completed environmental review unless ordered by a court. This is a direct legislative response to the Biden administration's practice of revisiting and revoking permits issued under the first Trump term.26
• "Major Federal Action" Redefinition: The bill clarifies that federal funding alone does not constitute a "major federal action" that triggers a full NEPA review. This would exempt many projects that receive federal grants but have minimal federal operational involvement.25
• Categorical Exclusions: It expands the use of categorical exclusions (CEs), allowing agencies to bypass detailed reviews for project types known to have minimal environmental impact.25

The Political and Industry Alignments

The committee markup revealed a complex political landscape. Industry support was broad and robust. Groups ranging from the American Clean Power Association (renewables) to the National Mining Association backed the bill, arguing that "NEPA abuse is strangling critical public and private investments".27 This highlights the "Green-Brown" alliance in permitting reform: both renewable energy developers (who need transmission lines) and fossil fuel/mining companies (who need pipelines and mines) agree that NEPA is too slow.

However, the vote was largely partisan (25-18). Ranking Member Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) and Rep. Jared Huffman (D-CA) led the opposition, framing the bill as an "all-out war on clean energy" and a "handout to polluters".23 They argued that shortening judicial review periods strips communities—particularly marginalized ones—of their ability to protect their local environments.

Despite Chairman Westerman’s efforts to court moderate Democrats with amendments, only Rep. Jared Golden (D-ME), the bill's co-sponsor, and Rep. Adam Gray (D-CA) voted in favor. The bill now heads to the full House, where it is expected to pass, setting up a showdown with the Senate filibuster.23

VII. Personnel is Policy: The Shape of the New Administration

Against the backdrop of legislative maneuvering, the Senate engaged in the critical task of confirming personnel for the second Trump administration. The week highlighted the tension between ideological loyalty and confirmability.

The Nuclear Renaissance: Confirmation of Ho Nieh

On November 19, the Senate confirmed Ho Nieh to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by a vote of 66-32.29 Nieh’s confirmation is pivotal for U.S. energy policy.

• The Nominee: Nieh is a technocrat with deep experience. He served as the Director of the NRC’s Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation and held executive roles at Southern Nuclear. His background combines regulatory expertise with industry experience.31
• The Bipartisan Signal: The vote was notably bipartisan, with 15 Democrats and Independent Angus King joining all Republicans. This reflects the growing consensus on the left and right that nuclear energy is essential for decarbonization and energy security. Nieh is expected to champion the implementation of the ADVANCE Act, recently passed legislation designed to speed up the licensing of Small Modular Reactors (SMRs).33
• Policy Implication: With Nieh confirmed, the NRC now has four commissioners (two Democrats, two Republicans). While still one short of a full complement, Nieh's presence breaks potential gridlock and tilts the agency toward a more streamlined regulatory approach favored by the incoming administration.30

The Cabinet Shuffle: Gaetz Out, Bondi In

The week also witnessed a high-profile collapse in the President’s cabinet selection. Former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Trump’s initial pick for Attorney General, withdrew his nomination on November 21 following intense Senate skepticism regarding his confirmability and past ethics investigations.34

Hours later, President Trump nominated Pam Bondi, the former Attorney General of Florida.

• The Pivot: The shift from Gaetz to Bondi represents a pivot from a "chaos agent" to a "loyalist professional." Bondi is a staunch Trump ally, having served on his defense team during the first impeachment, but she possesses the traditional credentials of a state Attorney General and prosecutor.
• Senate Reaction: Senate Republicans, who had signaled unease with Gaetz, generally welcomed the Bondi nomination. Her path to confirmation is expected to be smoother, though Democrats will likely scrutinize her fundraising history and legal alignment with Trump’s agenda.35

Snapshot of Key Nominations (As of Nov 21, 2025):

• Attorney General: Pam Bondi (pending).
• Secretary of State: Marco Rubio (pending).
• Secretary of Transportation: Sean Duffy (pending).
• EPA Administrator: Lee Zeldin (pending).
• NRC Commissioner: Ho Nieh (Confirmed).

VIII. Conclusion: The Road to 2026

The week of November 17, 2025, demonstrated that the 119th Congress has moved past the paralysis of the shutdown into a phase of aggressive, if fractured, activity. The passage of the Epstein Files Transparency Act showed that populist pressure can still force bipartisan action. The passage of the Alaska CRAs and the advancement of the SPEED Act signaled that the Republican majority is committed to a swift and comprehensive dismantling of the Biden-era regulatory state, using every legislative tool at their disposal.

However, the structural rifts exposed this week—specifically the "Arctic Frost" conflict between the House and Senate and the unresolved ACA subsidy cliff—suggest that the path forward will be volatile. With the government funded only partially through January 30, 2026, and the healthcare cliff looming on December 31, Congress faces a difficult winter. The "creative destruction" of this week has cleared the way for a new policy regime, but the stability of that regime remains an open question.

Works cited

1. Congress Ends Shutdown: What the New Funding Law Means for Major Industries, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.huschblackwell.com/newsandinsights/congress-ends-shutdown-what-the-new-funding-law-means-for-major-industries
2. Holland & Knight Health Dose: November 18, 2025, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2025/11/holland-knight-health-dose-november-18-2025
3. House votes to repeal provision that allows senators to sue over phone record seizures, accessed November 21, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/arctic-frost-senate-lawsuits-c266167102b9c367179618b6cd8bd697
4. Most GOP senators whose phone records were searched won't seek damages under new law, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/republican-senators-lawsuit-justice-department-500k/
5. H.R.4776 - SPEED Act 119th Congress (2025-2026), accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/4776
6. accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/80#:~:text=Passed%20Senate%20(10%2F30%2F,issued%20on%20April%2025%2C%202022.
7. Will Trump sign the Epstein bill and when could the files be released?, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/18/epstein-files-release-vote
8. Congressional Bill H.R. 4405 Signed into Law - The White House, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/2025/11/congressional-bill-h-r-4405-signed-into-law/
9. House Republicans fail in bid to censure Plaskett over Epstein texts, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/11/18/plaskett-epstein-censure/
10. Rep. Ralph Norman Introduces Resolution To Censure Dem Stacey Plaskett, accessed November 21, 2025, https://norman.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=3296
11. House gets back to work and quickly falls into a cycle of punishing its own, accessed November 21, 2025, https://apnews.com/article/stacey-plaskett-cory-mills-house-speaker-johnson-323969f10ebbbf87ede3a93c2d5bd535
12. Roll Call Votes - Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, accessed November 21, 2025, https://clerk.house.gov/Votes
13. House Republicans’ attempt to censure Democrat over texts with Epstein fails, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/19/republican-censure-stacey-plaskett-jeffrey-epstein
14. House votes to repeal shutdown deal provision allowing $500,000 lawsuits from senators, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/house-vote-500k-lawsuits-senators-shutdown-deal/
15. Sen. Blackburn pushes to repeal budget provision allowing lawsuits over phone records, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TAjKGs0Lck
16. House Republicans push vote to reverse provision allowing senators to sue over phone records - POLITICO Pro, accessed November 21, 2025, https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/2025/11/house-republicans-push-vote-to-reverse-provision-allowing-senators-to-sue-over-phone-records-00648323
17. Lindsey Graham blocks House-passed bill to repeal shutdown deal provision allowing $500,000 lawsuits from senators, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/lindsey-graham-blocks-bill-repeal-provision-allowing-lawsuits-senators/
18. Congressional Review Act | Overview and Tracking - National Conference of State Legislatures, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.ncsl.org/state-federal/congressional-review-act-overview-and-tracking
19. S.J.Res.80 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to "National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Integrated Activity Plan Record of Decision"., accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/80
20. S.J.Res.80 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Land Management relating to "National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska Integrated Activity Plan Record of Decision"., accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-joint-resolution/80/all-actions
21. Votes - Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, accessed November 21, 2025, https://clerk.house.gov/Votes?RollCallNum=296&BillNum=S.J.RES.80
22. Votes - Office of the Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives, accessed November 21, 2025, https://clerk.house.gov/Votes?RollCallNum=295&BillNum=H.J.RES.131
23. Natural Resources Committee approves NEPA overhaul, accessed November 21, 2025, https://huffman.house.gov/media-center/in-the-news/natural-resources-committee-approves-nepa-overhaul
24. Chairman LaMalfa Commends Natural Resources Committee Advancing the SPEED Act, accessed November 21, 2025, https://westerncaucus.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=7039
25. What's in the SPEED Act? - Bipartisan Policy Center, accessed November 21, 2025, https://bipartisanpolicy.org/issue-brief/whats-in-the-speed-act/
26. House Natural Resources Committee advances Standardizing Permitting and Expediting Economic Development (SPEED) Act | National Association of Counties, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.naco.org/news/house-natural-resources-committee-advances-standardizing-permitting-and-expediting-economic
27. NEPA bill includes amendment to protect project permits - E&E News by POLITICO, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.eenews.net/articles/nepa-bill-includes-amendment-to-protect-project-permits/
28. What They Are Saying: H.R. 4776, The SPEED Act - House Committee on Natural Resources, accessed November 21, 2025, https://republicans-naturalresources.house.gov/UploadedFiles/SPEED_ACT_WTAS_-_Energy.pdf
29. Wednesday, November 19, 2025 - U.S. Senate Daily Press, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.dailypress.senate.gov/wednesday-november-19-2025/
30. Nieh confirmed for the NRC, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.ans.org/news/article-7566/nieh-confirmed-for-the-nrc/
31. Biography, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.jaea.go.jp/04/kokusaibu/ja/event/20201022/pdf/8.Nieh.pdf
32. Ho Nieh | Southern Nuclear, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.southernnuclear.com/about-us/leadership/ho-nieh.html
33. E&E News: Senate confirms NRC nominee with broad support, accessed November 21, 2025, https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2025/11/19/senate-confirms-nrc-nominee-with-broad-support-00659481
34. Donald Trump's Cabinet, 2025 - Ballotpedia, accessed November 21, 2025, https://ballotpedia.org/Donald_Trump%27s_Cabinet,_2025
35. Trump has assembled least diverse US government this century, study shows, accessed November 21, 2025, https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/nov/21/trump-government-diversity