Veto-Proof Reform: Laws to Protect the Separation of Powers

Corey J. Biazzo, Esq.

2 hours ago

14 min read

Veto-Proof Reform: Realistic Legislation to Protect the Separation of Powers, the Courts, Voters, and Government Ethics

In short: The 120th Congress, which convenes on January 3, 2027, can pass reforms by simple majorities. Any bill the President vetoes, however, becomes law only if two-thirds of both the House and the Senate vote to override. No party is expected to hold two-thirds of either chamber, so every durable reform will need Republican votes. The most realistic path runs through proposals that already have bipartisan sponsors, that take effect for future Presidents of any party, and that ride on must-pass bills such as appropriations and the annual defense authorization. Constitutional amendments are worth proposing, but they require approval by three-quarters of the states and are unlikely to succeed in the near term.

This post sets out practical legislation to address problems documented over the past two years, including:

military action and domestic deployments without authorization from Congress;
tariffs imposed by emergency decree;
the use of the Justice Department against critics;
defiance of court orders;
federal interference in state election administration; and
conflicts of interest at the highest levels of government.

The goal is not to punish any one President. It is to restore guardrails that protect the separation of powers among the three federal branches and the States, for whoever holds power next.

Key takeaways

Passing a bill takes a majority in each chamber. In the Senate, most bills also need 60 votes to end a filibuster.
Overriding a veto takes two-thirds of each chamber of those present and voting: 290 Representatives and 67 Senators if every member votes.
Republican votes are essential. Without them, reforms can pass Congress but will be vetoed and will not become law.
The best vehicles are must-pass bills. Appropriations and the National Defense Authorization Act are hard to veto and can carry reforms.
Prospective effective dates help. Reforms that apply after January 20, 2029 bind future Presidents of both parties, which makes them easier to support.
Constitutional amendments are a long-term project. They need two-thirds of Congress, or a convention called by 34 States, plus ratification by 38 States.

How many votes does it take to pass a law, override a veto, or remove a President?

The numbers below assume full attendance: 435 Representatives and 100 Senators. Constitutional thresholds are generally measured against members present and voting, so the actual numbers shift with absences and vacancies.

Action	House	Senate	Source
Pass a bill	Simple majority (218)	Simple majority (51, or 50 plus the Vice President)	Art. I, §§ 5, 7
End a filibuster on most bills	Not applicable	Three-fifths of Senators duly chosen and sworn (60)	Senate Rule XXII
Override a presidential veto	Two-thirds present and voting (290)	Two-thirds present and voting (67)	Art. I, § 7, cl. 2
Impeach	Simple majority (218)	Not applicable	Art. I, § 2, cl. 5
Convict and remove	Not applicable	Two-thirds present (67)	Art. I, § 3, cl. 6
Propose a constitutional amendment	Two-thirds (290)	Two-thirds (67)	Art. V

How the veto works. After Congress passes a bill, the President has ten days, Sundays excepted, to sign or veto it. A vetoed bill returns to the chamber where it originated. If two-thirds of each chamber then vote to pass it again, it becomes law without the President's signature. If Congress adjourns and prevents the bill's return, an unsigned bill dies by "pocket veto," which cannot be overridden.

Overrides are rare. Congress has overridden only a small share of presidential vetoes in American history. One recent example came in January 2021, when Congress overrode President Trump's veto of the National Defense Authorization Act. That bill passed because it combined broad bipartisan support with must-pass defense funding.

Why Republican votes are necessary. Even with majorities in both chambers, a new majority party is unlikely to reach 290 House votes or 67 Senate votes by itself. Every reform in this post that the President opposes will need Republican support to become law. The same arithmetic applies to impeachment: the House can impeach by a majority, but removal requires 67 Senators. That is why reforms must be designed to attract members of both parties: neutral in principle, prospective in effect, and grounded in powers Congress has long claimed for itself.

How can Congress build a veto-proof coalition?

Veto-proof majorities are built, not inherited. Five strategies make them more likely:

Start with bills that already have Republican sponsors. Several reforms in this post have been introduced or co-led by Republicans in recent Congresses. Examples include tariff review, emergency-powers reform, a reporter's shield law, and limits on stock trading by officials. Building on those bills gives members a familiar starting point.
Make reforms prospective. A reform that takes effect at noon on January 20, 2029 applies to the next President, not the current one. Members of both parties can support it without being seen to take sides in a current dispute. Neither party knows who will hold the White House next.
Frame reforms as protecting Congress's own powers. War powers, the power of the purse, the taxing power, and subpoena enforcement belong to Congress as an institution. Members of both parties have an interest in defending them against any President.
Use must-pass vehicles. Appropriations bills and the National Defense Authorization Act, which Congress has passed every year for more than six decades, are difficult to veto. Reforms attached to them are far more likely to become law.
Pass narrow bills, one at a time. A single sweeping package gives opponents one target and one veto. A series of focused bills lets members vote for the pieces they support, and builds a record of bipartisan votes.

What legislation could realistically pass?

The proposals below respond to problems documented in court rulings and public records since 2025. Each has a realistic-prospects rating. Higher means Republicans have sponsored or supported similar measures. Moderate means bipartisan support is plausible with careful drafting. Lower means the measure is likely to divide along party lines. Several draw on bills from recent Congresses; staff should check the current text and sponsors before reintroducing them.

1. War powers and the domestic use of the military

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
War Powers Resolution reform	Define "hostilities" to include remote strikes; cut off funding automatically after 60 days without authorization; replace concurrent resolutions with joint resolutions that satisfy INS v. Chadha	Moderate. Members of both parties have co-sponsored reforms, such as the National Security Powers Act.
No force by designation	State that designating a group as a terrorist organization does not authorize military force; require Coast Guard interdiction procedures for suspected drug vessels	Moderate
National Guard and Insurrection Act reform	Define "rebellion" and "unable with the regular forces" in 10 U.S.C. § 12406; require written findings, time limits, and a governor's consent for deployments into another State; require congressional approval to extend an Insurrection Act deployment beyond a short period	Moderate. Governors of both parties have an interest in controlling their own Guard.
Posse Comitatus enforcement	Create a civil remedy and inspector-general reporting for violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1385	Lower

2. The power of the purse and the taxing power

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
Tariff review	New tariffs expire after a set period unless Congress approves them, modeled on the bipartisan Trade Review Act introduced in 2025 by Sens. Grassley and Cantwell	Higher
National emergencies reform	Emergency declarations expire after 30 days unless Congress votes to extend them, as in Sen. Mike Lee's ARTICLE ONE Act; bar using emergency statutes to impose tariffs	Higher
Judgment Fund limits	Bar Judgment Fund payments to future, unidentified claimants; require court approval and public disclosure of large settlements; require recusal and outside counsel when the President or a family member is a party	Higher. Republican Senators insisted on rescinding the 2026 "Anti-Weaponization Fund."
Impoundment enforcement	Give GAO expedited judicial review to enforce the Impoundment Control Act, and add reporting deadlines	Moderate

3. Protecting the courts

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
Compliance certification	Require agency heads to certify compliance with federal court orders within a set time, and report noncompliance to the Judiciary Committees	Moderate
Judicial security	Fund judicial security through the judiciary's own budget, reducing dependence on executive-branch protection	Higher
No removal around court orders	Bar removing a person while a court order prohibits it; require sworn verification of protection orders before removal flights; codify a duty to facilitate return after an unlawful removal	Moderate
Habeas and third-country removals	Require notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard before any removal to a third country	Moderate

4. Protecting Congress's investigative power

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
Subpoena enforcement	Create expedited court review of congressional subpoenas; impose personal civil penalties on officials who defy them without a valid privilege claim	Moderate. Both parties have been frustrated by Executive Branch defiance when in the majority.
Protecting members' speech	Bar the Executive Branch from using military retirement-grade proceedings or security clearances to punish members of Congress for official speech	Moderate

5. An independent Justice Department

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
White House–DOJ contacts	Codify limits on White House communications with the Justice Department about specific investigations, with logging and inspector-general audit	Moderate
Inspector General independence	Require for-cause removal, advance notice to Congress, and limits on acting appointments for inspectors general	Higher. Sen. Grassley and others have long championed IG independence.
Lawful prosecutor appointments	Tighten limits on interim and acting U.S. Attorneys under 28 U.S.C. § 546 and the Vacancies Act	Moderate
No punishing lawyers for their clients	Bar denying contracts, clearances, or building access to law firms because of whom they represent	Moderate
Reporter's shield	Limit compelled disclosure of journalists' sources and records, as in the PRESS Act, which passed the House without opposition in 2024	Higher

6. Protecting voters and state election administration

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
Election-period stability	Bar federal agencies from changing ballot-mail rules or election-related procedures within a set period before a federal election, absent congressional authorization	Moderate
Voter-data limits	Limit federal collection and use of state voter files; require accuracy standards, error-rate disclosure, and notice to affected voters before any federal challenge	Moderate
No taxpayer-funded campaigning	Bar federally funded advertising featuring the President, Vice President, or Cabinet officers within a set period before a federal election	Higher. Both parties object to this practice when the other holds the White House.
Hatch Act clarity	Apply the stricter political-activity rules to Senate-confirmed national-security officials, and give the Office of Special Counsel clear enforcement authority	Moderate

7. Ethics for the President and senior officials

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
Presidential conflicts	Extend the federal conflict-of-interest statute (18 U.S.C. § 208) to the President and Vice President, or require divestment or a qualified blind trust	Lower if immediate; moderate if effective in 2029
Emoluments enforcement	Require public disclosure of foreign-government payments to businesses owned by the President; create a consent procedure and a cause of action for enforcement	Moderate if prospective
Foreign gifts	Bar acceptance of aircraft and other high-value gifts from foreign governments without a recorded vote of Congress	Higher
Stock trading ban	Prohibit trading individual stocks by members of Congress, the President and Vice President, senior officials, and federal judges	Higher. Bipartisan bills have advanced in recent Congresses.
Official-communications profiteering	Bar senior officials from selling paid or early access to official announcements, or issuing financial products tied to their office	Higher if prospective
Library foundation and envoy disclosure	Require disclosure of large donors to presidential library foundations; require financial disclosure by anyone negotiating for the United States, whatever their title	Higher
Statute of limitations	Pause the limitations period for federal crimes committed by a sitting President, for future offenses	Moderate if prospective

8. Federal-state relations and use of force

Proposal	What it would do	Prospects
Evidence sharing	Require federal agencies to preserve evidence and share it with state investigators after a death involving federal agents, subject to narrow exceptions	Moderate
Body cameras and identification	Require body cameras and visible identification for federal immigration agents engaged in arrests	Lower to moderate
Civil remedy against federal officers	Create a statutory damages remedy for constitutional violations by federal officers, parallel to 42 U.S.C. § 1983	Lower

How can appropriations bills enforce these reforms?

The power of the purse is Congress's strongest tool. "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law" (Art. I, § 9, cl. 7). A President can veto a stand-alone reform bill at little cost. Vetoing the bill that funds the government, or the military, carries a far higher price.

Appropriations measures work in three main ways:

Limitation riders: "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used to..." These take effect for the fiscal year without creating permanent law.
Conditions: funds become available only after an agency produces records, certifies compliance, or reports to Congress.
Fencing: a portion of an agency's funds is withheld until a specific condition is met, such as compliance with a court order or a subpoena.

Riders like these could address the problems described above:

Rider or condition	Purpose
No funds for military strikes against a nation or group not covered by a declaration of war or an authorization for use of military force, except to repel an attack	Restores Congress's war power
No funds to deploy the National Guard or active-duty forces to a State over its governor's objection, absent an Insurrection Act invocation reported to Congress	Protects federalism and civilian control
No funds for Judgment Fund payments to future, unidentified claimants, or to settle claims brought by the President or the President's family	Prevents self-dealing settlements
No funds for advertising that features the President or Cabinet officers within 90 days of a federal election	Ends taxpayer-funded campaigning
No funds to remove any person in violation of a court order, or to a country a protection order forbids	Protects the courts and due process
Fence a share of an agency's appropriation until it complies with a congressional subpoena or a court order	Makes compliance enforceable
Require body cameras, evidence preservation, and evidence sharing with state investigators as a condition of DHS enforcement funding	Accountability for use of force
Fund GAO, inspectors general, the Office of Special Counsel, and FOIA offices at levels sufficient to do their jobs	Builds lasting oversight capacity
No funds to transfer the Qatari 747-8 to any private entity, including a presidential library foundation	Enforces the Emoluments Clause

Realistic expectations. Riders are negotiated, and many are dropped in conference with the Senate or traded away. A President may still veto an appropriations bill, risking a shutdown. Even so, riders that attract bipartisan support, such as protections for the Guard, transparency requirements, and limits on self-dealing settlements, have a far better chance on a must-pass bill than on their own. Because riders usually last only one fiscal year, they must be renewed each year or written into permanent law.

What about constitutional amendments?

Some problems cannot be fully fixed by statute. A statute cannot overrule the Supreme Court's reading of the Constitution, as in the presidential-immunity decision, and Congress generally cannot limit the President's pardon power by law. A clear bar on self-pardons is one example that would require an amendment. A constitutional amendment can do what a statute cannot, but the bar is deliberately high.

How Article V works

Proposal. Congress proposes an amendment by a two-thirds vote of both the House and the Senate. Alternatively, Congress must call a convention when two-thirds of the state legislatures (34) apply for one. No Article V convention has ever been held.
Ratification. The amendment becomes part of the Constitution when ratified by three-quarters of the States (38), either by their legislatures or by state conventions, as Congress specifies. Congress may set a deadline for ratification.
No presidential role. The President cannot sign or veto a proposed amendment (Hollingsworth v. Virginia, 3 U.S. 378 (1798)).

Why success is unlikely in the near term. The Constitution has been amended 27 times. The last amendment to be both proposed and ratified in the ordinary course was the Twenty-Sixth, lowering the voting age to 18, in 1971. The Twenty-Seventh, ratified in 1992, was proposed in 1789. Only 13 States are needed to block ratification. In an evenly divided country, an amendment needs broad support in States controlled by both parties. Few proposals clear that bar.

Ballot initiatives cannot ratify federal amendments. The Supreme Court held in Hawke v. Smith, 253 U.S. 221 (1920), that ratification belongs to state legislatures or conventions, not to a popular referendum.

Citizens can still make a difference:

Voters can elect state legislators who support an amendment, and urge them to apply for a convention or to ratify.
Advisory ballot measures can show public support, although they bind no one.
In the roughly half of States with a citizen-initiative process, voters can amend their own state constitutions. They can protect state election administration, strengthen state ethics rules, and support state prosecutors and investigators.

Amendments worth proposing anyway. Proposing an amendment builds public understanding and sets an agenda for the long term. Four candidates follow directly from recent events:

Proposed amendment	What it would do
Presidential accountability	Provide that the President and other officers are subject to the criminal law for acts that violate it, except as Congress provides by law. This would address the scope of Trump v. United States.
Pardon limits	Bar a President from pardoning himself, his family, or anyone in exchange for a thing of value; permit Congress to require disclosure of pardon communications
Emoluments enforcement	Require public disclosure of foreign and state payments to a President's businesses, and give Congress and injured parties standing to enforce the Emoluments Clauses
War powers	Require express authorization from Congress for any sustained use of military force abroad beyond a short defensive period

To attract bipartisan support, any of these could take effect years after ratification, so that no one knows which party's President it would bind first.

About the Biazzo Law Government Oversight Program

The Biazzo Law Government Oversight Program is a nonpartisan public-service initiative that promotes constitutional accountability through lawful, peaceful, and fact-based means. It monitors the use of government power, explains pending constitutional questions in plain language, pursues public records through FOIA, and files amicus briefs in significant cases. Members of Congress and staff are welcome to use these proposals as a starting point for legislative drafting. If you would like to discuss them, request a time, email corey@biazzolaw.com, or call (703) 297-5777.

Frequently asked questions

How many votes does it take to override a presidential veto? Two-thirds of the members present and voting in both the House and the Senate. With full attendance, that is 290 Representatives and 67 Senators.

Why will Congress need Republican votes to pass reforms? Neither party is expected to hold two-thirds of either chamber in the 120th Congress. Any reform the President vetoes therefore needs Republican votes to become law. Removal after impeachment likewise requires 67 Senators.

What is the most realistic way to pass reforms over a veto? Attach bipartisan reforms to must-pass legislation, such as appropriations bills or the annual National Defense Authorization Act. Make reforms prospective, effective for future Presidents, and build on bills that already have Republican sponsors.

Can Congress limit the President's power through appropriations? Yes. Under the Appropriations Clause, Congress can bar spending on specific activities, attach conditions to funds, and withhold funds until agencies comply. These riders generally last one fiscal year unless written into permanent law.

How is the Constitution amended? Congress proposes an amendment by a two-thirds vote of both chambers, or a convention is called at the request of 34 state legislatures. Three-quarters of the States (38) must then ratify. The President has no role.

Can voters ratify a constitutional amendment by ballot initiative? No. Under Hawke v. Smith (1920), ratification belongs to state legislatures or conventions. Voters can elect legislators who support an amendment, pass advisory measures, and, in many States, amend their own state constitutions by initiative.

Are these reforms aimed at one President or party? No. They protect the separation of powers, the courts, voters, and ethical government against abuse by any President. Many would take effect after January 20, 2029, before anyone knows who the next President will be.

This post is provided for public education by the Biazzo Law Government Oversight Program. It is not legal advice and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Bills referenced from prior Congresses should be checked for current text and sponsorship. Information is current as of November 4, 2026.