Constitution Index · S.J.Res. 28 · 2025-02-27
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".
Latest official status (2025-05-09): Became Public Law No: 119-11.
Constitutional grade
A
Constitutional
SJRES 28 is a constitutional exercise of congressional legislative and oversight power that nullifies an expanded CFPB supervisory rule over large digital payment apps. It rests on Article I commerce and oversight authority, enacted through proper bicameralism and presentment, infringes no Bill of Rights protection, expands individual economic liberty, returns power downward, and takes no property or due process. Analysis by SI finds no constitutional defect.
Article I Article I, Section 1 Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 Amendment I Amendment VIII Amendment IV Amendment IX Amendment X Amendment V Amendment XIV, Section 1
SI-generated grade · passed automated checks (real Constitution citation, language rules) · not individually reviewed by a person · methodology · Report an error: hello@valuesforamerica.com
The five checks
Enumerated powers · passes
Congress has explicit authority to disapprove executive agency rules through legislation. Authority rests in Article I, Section 1 vesting legislative power in Congress, Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 over interstate commerce which payment apps conduct, and Article I, Section 8, Clause 18 to make laws necessary and proper for overseeing agencies Congress created. Passage followed Article I, Section 7, Clause 2 bicameralism and presentment, evidenced by enactment as Public Law No. 119-11.
Bill of Rights · passes
The resolution infringes no right in Amendments 1-10. It does not restrict speech, religion, press, assembly under the First Amendment, does not touch Second, Third, Fourth, Sixth, Seventh, or Eighth Amendment protections, and does not create any search, seizure, or compelled testimony. By removing expanded CFPB supervisory authority over nonbank payment app transaction data, it reduces rather than increases potential Fourth Amendment and Ninth Amendment privacy concerns.
Individual liberty · passes
The resolution restricts no person, property, labor, speech, or belief. It removes a federal supervisory expansion over general-use digital payment applications, thereby reducing compliance burdens on nonbank providers and surveillance exposure for users. The burden on government to justify expanded supervision is enforced here by Congress withholding that justification, leaving individual economic liberty intact.
Decentralization · passes
Applying the four-question test under the Tenth Amendment: (1) individuals cannot alone supervise large payment markets, (2) local counties cannot supervise interstate payment networks, (3) states can handle consumer-protection supervision under their own financial and deceptive-practice laws without federal involvement, (4) this action does NOT consolidate upward - it reverses federal consolidation by nullifying a federal rule and returning authority to Congress, the states, and the market. It moves power downward.
Due process and takings · passes
No deprivation of life, liberty, or property without due process under the Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment Section 1, and no taking without just compensation. The resolution imposes no fine, forfeiture, license revocation, or property seizure, and provides full procedural regularity through bicameralism and presentment under Article I, Section 7, Clause 2, with public notice via Public Law No. 119-11.
Provenance
- Congress.gov: SJRES 28 summary · fetched 2026-10-08 · official page ↗
Version history · never overwritten
| Grade | Graded | Rubric | Source hash | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A · #208 | 2026-10-08 | vfa-constitutional-grade/1.0 | 35cd65d74e7e | current |
Cite this
Values for America. “Constitutional grade: S.J.Res. 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"..” VFA Constitution Index, grade 208 (rubric vfa-constitutional-grade/1.0), graded October 8, 2026. https://www.valuesforamerica.com/constitution-index/grades/208. Accessed 2026-10-20.
Permalink: https://www.valuesforamerica.com/constitution-index/grades/208
Data: this grade as JSON · full export. Attribution required.