The American Prospect reports that Senate Republicans are now openly ignoring their own rules so they can pass laws without the filibuster blocking the way. The Repubs are doing this to get djt's bill passed. That bill can be informally called the tax breaks for rich people, no support for poor people, lots of corruption, and lots more debt for the rest of us law. To do it over Dem Senators' opposition, Senate Repubs are simply ignoring the Senate's rule keeper's inconvenient assertions that they are breaking their own rules. The Senate's rule keeper is called the Senate parliamentarian. TAP describes it like this:
It’s refreshing in a way that we no longer have to spend much time thinking about the Senate parliamentarian, the shadowy figure whose rulings supposedly decide what the Senate can and cannot do. Republicans put that to bed last week by overruling the parliamentarian over whether a Congressional Review Act (CRA) resolution could nullify the Environmental Protection Agency’s waiver allowing California to set its own air pollution standards on vehicles.
Only executive branch agency rules can be overturned by a CRA resolution, and only within 60 legislative days after being presented to Congress, in an up-or-down vote that avoids the Senate filibuster. The Senate parliamentarian, joining the auditors at the Government Accountability Office, said that the EPA waivers were not “rules” as defined by the CRA, and therefore couldn’t be put into a resolution. Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), in a communication he sent last Congress about these very EPA waivers, agreed that the “federal preemption waivers cannot be reviewed under the Congressional Review Act.”
Yet Senate Republicans said, “Tough, we’re doing it anyway.” And Lee voted with them.
California says that it will sue to maintain its waiver, arguing that the Senate had no authority to overturn it. But here is the gigantic problem: The Senate operates mostly on precedent. The precedent is now set that the parliamentarian can be been disregarded on this point. Now, any action the executive branch takes could be construed as a rule, and therefore subject to fast-track congressional review. All of a sudden the filibuster has been effectively circumvented while Repub Senators can say they did not get rid of the filibuster, they just reinterpreted Senate rules to allow them to bypass it.
Democrats have denounced the planned vote since parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, a nonpartisan arbiter of Senate rules, sided with the GAO finding. If followed, the determination would have prevented Republicans from considering the waiver at a simple majority threshold. Republicans argue that the waivers should be considered rules under the Congressional Review Act. That is the stated interpretation by both the House and the djt administration.
The Washington Examiner writes in an article entitled, Thune ignores parliamentarian to tee up California emissions vote:
“This debate is not about destroying Senate procedure, or any other hysterical claim that Democrats are making. And I have to say that my colleagues’ newfound interest in defending Senate procedure is touching — if a touch surprising,” Thune said on Tuesday. “It’s only last year Democrats were planning to destroy one of the bedrocks of the Senate, the legislative filibuster, and of course Democrats’ concern about overruling the parliamentarian is a bit unexpected, given Democrats’ documented history of attempting to do exactly that,” he added.
In a defiant speech from the Senate floor, Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) insisted that Republicans were not weakening the filibuster by ignoring the Governmental Accountability Office, which found the standards are not subject to repeal.
MAGA's Senate smoke, mirrors & fig leaf
MAGA Repubs used a sophisticated procedural maneuver to ignore the parliamentarian's ruling. It is designed to avoid the appearance of directly overruling the Senate's nonpartisan rules referee. Instead of explicitly voting to override MacDonough's ruling, Thune employed creative Senate rule interpretations to create new precedent during Senate proceedings. The majority leader structured the vote in a way that allowed Republicans to claim they were not directly contradicting the parliamentarian while still achieving their policy objective of passing the resolution with only 51 votes.
How big a deal is this? I asked Pxy for a detailed analysis. I think Thune and Senate Repubs are cynical liars and this is extremely important. Gutting the filibuster is something I predicted last November after the 2024 elections [1].
Q: Rank the importance of this from 1 (low importance) to 9 (highest possible importance) in terms of the overall Senate impact of ignoring the parliamentarian in this situation on (1) democracy, (2) the rule of law, and (3) the remaining vitality of the Senate filibuster. Take into account Trump's and MAGA elite's clearly authoritarian politics, e.g., Project 2025, and their mendacity and deceit in political tactics and rhetoric.A: (analysis greatly shortened to avoid TL/DR)
1. Impact on Democracy Rank: 9/9
Ignoring the parliamentarian in this context represents a direct assault on democratic norms by enabling unilateral simple majority rule.2. Impact on the Rule of Law Rank: 8/9
The rule of law depends on adherence to established procedures and respect for nonpartisan arbiters like the parliamentarian. Senate Republicans’ decision to override Elizabeth MacDonough’s guidance 2 4 14 —rooted in the GAO’s legal analysis 9 10— substitutes partisan preference for objective interpretation of statutory requirements.3. Impact on the Filibuster’s Vitality Rank: 9/9
This action constitutes a de facto "nuclear option" for expanding filibuster exceptions. By bypassing the parliamentarian to pass legislation with a simple majority, Republicans are chipping away at the 60-vote threshold’s relevance. While framed as a "narrow exception" 6 14, the precedent empowers future majorities to similarly disregard procedural guardrails, accelerating the Senate’s shift toward simple majority rule.
In short, Senate Repubs have weaponized procedural loopholes to bypass the parliamentarian. This guts the filibuster and inflicts maximum institutional damage within existing Senate rules. MAGA Repubs have (i) eroded democratic accountability, (ii) further weakened already weak rule-of-law norms, and (iii) rendered the filibuster almost irrelevant. It constitutes trifecta of democratic and rule of law damage that mirrors Project 2025’s vision of basically unchecked authoritarian power.
Footnote:
1. This was my Nov. 6, 2024 prediction right after the elections: If the Repubs maintain control of the House, I expect the Senate to get rid of the filibuster. That would give Repubs in congress free reign to pass whatever laws they want with no serious opposition from Dems. The only requirement there would be unity within the GOP, something that Trump is more than capable of imposing on them.
The Repubs didn't get rid of the filibuster, they just bypassed it. I consider this prediction to be ~90% fulfilled, i.e., a lot more right than wrong. What is left of the filibuster is a fig leaf.