Model Bills to Restore Checks and Balances | 120th Congress
Legislating Checks and Balances: How the 120th Congress Can Write Constitutional Reforms Now and Enact Them for Every Future President
By Corey J. Biazzo, Esq., Biazzo Law, PLLC — part of the Biazzo Law Government Oversight Program. Country over Party. Patriot over Partisan.
In short: Oversight finds problems; legislation fixes them. The Biazzo Law Government Oversight Program has drafted the Restoring Checks and Balances Act of 2027, a model bill in nine titles that turns the lessons of our 120th Congress oversight series into permanent law: enforceable congressional subpoenas, protected whistleblowers and inspectors general, a restored power of the purse, war powers and domestic-deployment limits, protections for state-run elections, anti-corruption and emoluments rules, Justice Department and law-enforcement accountability, and the return of tariff power to Congress. Every provision is drafted to respect the Constitution's separation of powers — including recent Supreme Court decisions on presidential immunity, removal, and tariffs — and every rule binding the President takes effect January 20, 2029, so it applies equally to whoever wins in 2028. A President may veto it today. But introducing, hearing, and reporting these bills now gives Congress a stronger legislative purpose for oversight, builds the factual record, and prepares the law for a future Congress and President willing to sign it.
Key facts at a glance
Question | Answer |
What is it? | A model omnibus bill, the Restoring Checks and Balances Act of 2027, with nine titles that can also be introduced separately |
Where must it start? | In the House, because Title VIII changes customs duties and refunds, and "[a]ll Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House" (Art. I, § 7, cl. 1) |
How does it become law? | Passage by both Houses and the President's signature, or a two-thirds override vote in each House (Art. I, § 7) |
When does it bind the President? | January 20, 2029, for provisions that apply to the President personally |
What does it not do? | It does not limit the pardon power, the President's removal of officers, the President's direction of prosecutions, or the power to repel sudden attacks |
Can it help oversight now? | Yes. Pending legislation supplies the "valid legislative purpose" courts look for when Congress issues subpoenas (Trump v. Mazars USA, LLP, 591 U.S. 848 (2020)) |
Disclosure: This post was written by the law firm that drafted the model bill, which has also filed amicus briefs in several of the cases discussed. It is written for every member of Congress, regardless of party.
Why should Congress legislate now if a veto is likely?
Because legislation does work long before it becomes law.
It anchors oversight in a legislative purpose. Congress's power to investigate exists to support its power to legislate. "[T]he power of inquiry — with process to enforce it — is an essential and appropriate auxiliary to the legislative function" (McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135, 174 (1927)), and it is "as penetrating and far-reaching as the potential power to enact and appropriate under the Constitution" (Eastland v. U.S. Servicemen's Fund, 421 U.S. 491, 504 n.15 (1975)). When a committee subpoenas documents about IEEPA tariffs while a bill to amend IEEPA is pending before it, the legislative purpose is concrete, not speculative. Under Trump v. Mazars, "detailed and substantial" evidence of legislative purpose strengthens a subpoena for presidential information.
It builds the factual record. Bills come with findings, hearings, and committee reports. Testimony, documents, photos, and videos gathered to support a bill are preserved in the committee record, and committee reports become part of the legislative history courts consult.
It preserves evidence. A pending bill gives committees reason to send preservation letters, to keep investigating across sessions, and to reissue subpoenas when a new Congress begins.
It sets the agenda for the next Congress and President. Bills that have been drafted, scored, heard, and reported can move quickly when the political alignment changes. Whatever party holds the House, Senate, and Presidency after the 2028 election, a ready-made, vetted bill is far more likely to pass than an idea.
It can pass in pieces now. Many of these reforms have bipartisan sponsors or precedents and can be attached to must-pass bills, as explained below.
It is fair. Rules that bind the President take effect January 20, 2029. A sitting President is not targeted, and the next President — of either party — is bound by the same rules.
What constitutional rules must these bills follow?
A reform that a court strikes down protects no one. The model bill is built around the Constitution's text and the Supreme Court's current precedents — including decisions many reformers disagree with.
Congress's powers
All legislative powers are vested in Congress (Art. I, § 1), including the powers to tax and lay duties, regulate foreign commerce, declare war, raise and support armies, govern the militia, and make all laws "necessary and proper" for carrying out the powers of every branch (Art. I, § 8).
The power of the purse: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law" (Art. I, § 9, cl. 7).
Elections: Congress may "make or alter" state regulations for congressional elections (Art. I, § 4, cl. 1) and enforce voting-rights amendments.
Emoluments: no federal officeholder may accept foreign presents or emoluments "without the Consent of the Congress" (Art. I, § 9, cl. 8).
The limits the bill respects
Limit | Source | How the bill complies |
The pardon power "is not subject to legislative control" | Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 333, 380 (1866); United States v. Klein (1872) | Regulates paid clemency advocacy and bribery by private persons; never limits a pardon |
Officers exercising executive power are generally removable at will | Trump v. Slaughter (2026), overruling Humphrey's Executor | Notice, reasons, and acting-official limits for inspectors general and special counsels; no for-cause removal protection |
The President directs investigations and prosecutions | Trump v. United States, 603 U.S. 593 (2024) | Contact logs and reports by subordinate officials only; the President's own communications are excluded |
No legislative veto | INS v. Chadha, 462 U.S. 919 (1983) | Uses joint resolutions presented to the President |
No commandeering of States | Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997) | Duties fall on federal agencies and officers |
No interference with final judgments | Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, 514 U.S. 211 (1995) | Expressly preserves final judgments |
No bills of attainder or ex post facto laws | Art. I, § 9, cl. 3; United States v. Lovett, 328 U.S. 303 (1946); Stogner v. California, 539 U.S. 607 (2003) | General, prospective rules; limitations tolling only where the period has not expired |
Provisions binding the President must say so | Franklin v. Massachusetts, 505 U.S. 788 (1992) | Names the President expressly where intended |
Article III standing requires concrete injury | TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. 413 (2021); Blumenthal v. Trump, 949 F.3d 14 (D.C. Cir. 2020) | Emoluments cause of action limited to injured persons |
The bill also includes a severability clause and a fast-track judicial-review provision modeled on the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, so any constitutional challenge reaches the Supreme Court quickly and leaves the rest of the law intact.
What would the Restoring Checks and Balances Act do?
Title | Problem it addresses | Key provisions | Related oversight plan |
I. Congressional subpoena enforcement | Subpoena fights outlast the Congress that issued them | Fast-track civil enforcement in D.C. federal court; no "absolute immunity" defense for senior advisers; privilege logs; personal civil penalties only after a final court order is defied; preservation duty; DOJ must explain contempt declinations; no military or clearance retaliation against Members for official speech | |
II. Privilege, whistleblowers, inspectors general, records | Vague privilege claims; gag orders; IG firings without notice; disappearing messages | Privilege asserted by the President personally and item by item; stronger protection for employees who contact Congress; 30-day notice and reasons for IG removals, career-only acting IGs, back-pay remedy; ban on auto-deleting apps for official business | |
III. Power of the purse and emergencies | Hidden apportionment footnotes; pocket rescissions; permanent "emergencies"; Judgment Fund self-dealing | Public apportionments; late-year withholding barred; faster GAO enforcement; national emergencies lapse after 30 days unless Congress approves; Judgment Fund limits and court approval of settlements involving the President or family | |
IV. War powers and domestic deployments | Strikes without authorization; Guard and troops deployed into cities | "Hostilities" defined to include remote strikes; funds cut off after 60 days without authorization (with exceptions for attack, rescue, and withdrawal); terrorist designations are not authorization for force; written findings, 14-day limit, and judicial review for Insurrection Act deployments; limits on cross-state Guard use; Posse Comitatus civil remedy | |
V. Elections | Executive orders on election rules; voter-roll demands; armed agents near polls | No executive changes to federal election forms or rules without a statute; EAC independence; clarified ban on armed federal personnel at election sites; limits on federal collection of voter data and SAVE safeguards; election-period stability; no taxpayer-funded ads featuring officials before elections; protection for election officials | |
VI. Anti-corruption and ethics | Foreign money, high-value foreign gifts, library donations, stock trading, paid pardon brokers | Quarterly disclosure of government payments to presidential family businesses; consent only by law for foreign emoluments; foreign gifts over $1 million stay U.S. property; library donor disclosure; stock-trading ban for all three branches; clemency-advocacy registration and anti-bribery; tolling of limitations periods for presidential offenses | |
VII. Justice Department and law enforcement | Political pressure on cases; masked agents; no damages remedy | White House–DOJ contact logs; statutory special counsels with reporting; limits on interim U.S. attorneys; no retaliation against lawyers for their clients; reporters' shield; visible ID and body cameras; evidence sharing with state investigators; a statutory damages remedy against federal officers; judicial warrants for home entry; court-order compliance certifications | |
VIII. Tariffs | Taxes on Americans without a vote of Congress | IEEPA never authorizes duties; new tariffs lapse after 60 days unless Congress approves; Section 122 defined; Section 338 repealed; country-specific Section 301 findings; automatic refunds with interest for every importer; exclusion transparency and recusal | |
IX. General provisions | Litigation and implementation | Three-judge court and direct Supreme Court review; rules of construction protecting constitutional powers; severability; 2029 effective date for presidential provisions |
The full bill text, with section-by-section drafting notes, is available from the Biazzo Law Government Oversight Program on request.
How does pending legislation strengthen oversight today?
Committees can use the bill as the backbone of a lawful investigation:
State the legislative purpose in writing. Each committee's authorizing resolution or chair's memorandum should cite the specific title it is considering. For example: "The Committee is investigating the imposition of duties under Sections 122, 232, 301, and 338 in order to consider Title VIII of the Restoring Checks and Balances Act." Courts look for exactly this kind of concrete link (Watkins v. United States, 354 U.S. 178, 200 (1957) (no power "to expose for the sake of exposure"); Mazars).
Preserve evidence early. Send preservation letters to every agency on day one. Because subpoenas expire at the end of each Congress (Committee on the Judiciary v. Miers, 542 F.3d 909 (D.C. Cir. 2008)), early preservation protects the record for future Congresses.
Request, then subpoena. Begin with voluntary requests and accommodation, as the D.C. Circuit has said the branches must (United States v. AT&T, 567 F.2d 121, 127 (D.C. Cir. 1977)), then issue narrow subpoenas for documents, photos, videos, and testimony tied to the bill.
Hear from both sides. Invite affected citizens, state officials, career civil servants, experts, and the administration. A balanced record is harder to dismiss and more persuasive to colleagues who will vote on the bill.
Protect witnesses. Federal employees have a statutory right to communicate with Congress (5 U.S.C. § 7211), and whistleblower reprisal is prohibited (5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8)).
Write findings into the bill. Section 2 of the model bill contains findings; committees should update them with testimony and documents they gather. Findings help courts understand why Congress acted.
Report the bill. A committee report explaining each provision, the evidence supporting it, and its constitutional basis becomes the record a future Congress — and a reviewing court — will read.
For detailed investigative plans on each topic, see our Trump impeachment investigative plan, Accountability and Deterrence, and the topic-specific oversight plans linked above.
What is the path to passage?
Path | How it works | Best candidates from the model bill |
Stand-alone bills | Introduce individual titles with their own sponsors | Stock-trading ban; IG notice and acting-IG limits; tariff approval; reporters' shield |
Must-pass vehicles | Attach to the National Defense Authorization Act or appropriations acts, which Presidents rarely veto | War-powers funding limits; Posse Comitatus reporting; Judgment Fund limits; national emergencies reform |
Appropriations riders | One-year limits on how funds may be spent (Art. I, § 9, cl. 7) | Bar funds for armed agents at polls, for removals that violate court orders, for ads featuring officials before elections, or for transferring foreign gifts to private foundations |
Veto override | Two-thirds of those present and voting in each House (Art. I, § 7, cl. 2) | Reforms framed as protecting Congress's own powers, which members of both parties share an institutional interest in |
Enactment in 2029 or later | A House, Senate, and President willing to sign | The full omnibus bill, already drafted, heard, and reported |
Constitutional amendment | Two-thirds of both Houses and three-fourths of the States (Art. V); the President has no role | Limits on self-pardons and on the scope of presidential immunity, which statutes cannot reach |
The model bill's effective-date rule matters here. Because provisions that bind the President start on January 20, 2029, members who support a sitting President can vote for them without voting against that President, and a President elected in 2028 who signs the bill agrees to live by the same rules. Bipartisan precedents exist: the Trade Review Act had Republican and Democratic sponsors, the PRESS Act passed the House without opposition in 2024, and inspector-general protections have long had bipartisan champions.
What are the strongest objections?
Fairness requires stating them.
"This weakens the presidency." Supporters of a strong executive argue that the Constitution vests "the executive Power" in one President, that energy in the executive protects national security, and that Congress already has tools — appropriations and impeachment — without new statutory limits. The model bill responds by preserving every power the Supreme Court has called exclusive to the President and regulating only agencies, officers, funds, and procedures.
"Courts should stay out of political disputes." Some argue that subpoena fights and deployment decisions are political questions. The bill supplies clear statutory standards, which courts are equipped to apply, while preserving deference to genuine factual findings.
"Emergencies need speed." The emergency, war-powers, and deployment provisions allow immediate action and require congressional approval only after a set period. Sanctions and responses to sudden attack are expressly preserved.
"Tariffs need flexibility in negotiations." The bill allows tariffs to take effect immediately and lets them continue if Congress approves within 60 days — the same design as the bipartisan Trade Review Act.
"Ethics rules for the President add qualifications for office." The bill relies on disclosure, investment rules, and recusal rather than eligibility requirements, and delays its application to the President until 2029.
"No statute can be guaranteed constitutional." True. That is why the bill includes severability, rules of construction, and fast-track review — and why each provision should be reviewed by the Office of Legislative Counsel before introduction.
Let's talk
Checks and balances are not a partisan idea. They protect every American from the abuse of power by any official of any party. If you are a member of the 120th Congress, a committee staffer, a legislative counsel, or a state official who wants to turn oversight into lasting law, the Biazzo Law Government Oversight Program can provide the full model bill text, section-by-section drafting notes, and help tailoring individual titles. Contact us here.
Companion resources for the 120th Congress
Legislative and investigative toolkits
Oversight plans
Accountability
Open letters
Frequently asked questions
Can Congress pass laws limiting presidential power? Yes, within limits. Congress can regulate agencies, officers, funds, and procedures it creates, and can condition or withdraw powers it delegated by statute. It cannot limit powers the Constitution gives the President alone, such as the pardon power.
What happens if the President vetoes a reform bill? Congress can override with two-thirds of those present and voting in each House. Otherwise, the bill can be reintroduced, attached to must-pass legislation, or enacted later by a future Congress and President.
Why do the presidential provisions start in 2029? So the rules apply equally to the next President of either party and do not target any sitting President, which makes bipartisan support more likely and reduces constitutional objections.
Does a pending bill help congressional investigations? Yes. Courts ask whether a subpoena serves a valid legislative purpose. A pending bill on the same subject is strong evidence of that purpose.
Can Congress protect inspectors general from being fired? After Trump v. Slaughter (2026), a for-cause removal limit would likely be struck down. Congress can still require advance notice and reasons, limit who serves as acting inspector general, and provide back pay for violations.
Can Congress take back the power to impose tariffs? Yes. The Constitution gives Congress the power to lay duties. Congress can amend or repeal any statute that delegates tariff authority, require congressional approval for new tariffs, and mandate refunds of unlawful duties.
Disclaimer
This post and the model bill are for general informational and educational purposes only. They are not legal advice and do not create an attorney-client relationship. No one can guarantee how a court will rule on any provision, and every bill should be reviewed by the House or Senate Office of Legislative Counsel before introduction. Case law and pending litigation are current as of November 13, 2026. Biazzo Law, PLLC drafted the model bill discussed here and has filed amicus briefs in related cases.
Comments