Guide to Government · How Government Works
The Rulemaking Process
Follow how agencies turn statutes into detailed rules through notice, comment, review, and final publication.
What Rulemaking Is
Rulemaking is the process agencies use to create binding regulations. Congress often writes broad statutes that set goals, create programs, assign duties, or prohibit certain conduct — agencies then write more detailed rules explaining how those statutes work in practice. A regulation can affect forms, deadlines, eligibility standards, safety requirements, environmental limits, financial disclosures, workplace duties, grants, inspections, and enforcement. That’s why rulemaking is one of the most important places where federal policy becomes real for ordinary people, businesses, and communities.
Where Rulemaking Authority Comes From
An agency can’t regulate simply because it thinks a topic is important. It must identify legal authority, usually from a statute passed by Congress, that creates the agency, assigns a mission, authorizes a program, or tells the agency to issue rules on a specific topic. Sometimes Congress gives detailed instructions; other times it gives broad authority and leaves technical details to the agency — which is why rulemaking often involves specialized expertise across environmental science, aviation safety, food and drug standards, labor rules, banking, telecommunications, and more.
The Notice-And-Comment Process
The most common federal rulemaking process follows a recognizable path.
Draft Proposal
Agency staff develop the policy, legal reasoning, and proposed regulatory text.
NPRM
The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is published in the Federal Register and opens the official public-comment process.
Public Comment
The public submits written data, arguments, examples, and objections.
Final Rule
The agency reviews the record, then publishes the final regulatory text and explains what changed and why.
After the comment period closes, the agency may change the rule, narrow it, expand it, reopen comments, issue a supplemental proposal, or abandon it entirely. A finalized rule must explain its basis, purpose, effective date, and response to significant comments.
How People Can Participate
Public participation isn’t just a courtesy — in ordinary notice-and-comment rulemaking, the agency must give interested people a real opportunity to submit written views, data, and arguments. Comments can support a proposal, oppose it, identify problems, offer alternatives, explain costs, or correct factual assumptions. The most practical starting point is Regulations.gov: search by agency, title, keyword, or docket number, read the Federal Register notice first, then open the docket to see supporting documents, submitted comments, and deadlines.
Not Every Rule Uses the Same Path
Notice-and-comment rulemaking is the ordinary path, but agencies use other tools in limited situations. These variations matter because the amount of public input, the speed of the process, and the record available for review can differ.
Formal rulemaking
Rare, and resembles a trial-like hearing, used only when a statute specifically requires it.
Direct final rules
Often used for noncontroversial changes.
Interim final rules
May take effect quickly when an agency has good cause, while still allowing comments afterward.
Negotiated rulemaking
Brings affected groups together before a proposal is formally published.
Who Reviews a Final Rule
A final rule isn’t the end of oversight. The agency itself must explain its reasoning and respond to significant comments.
The agency
Must explain its reasoning and respond to significant public comments received.
Congress
Can review and potentially disapprove a rule under the Congressional Review Act.
Courts
Review whether the agency acted within legal authority, followed required procedures, and explained its choices adequately — typically asking whether the rule is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or unsupported by the record. Since Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, courts interpret statutes independently rather than automatically deferring to an agency’s reasonable interpretation.
Why rulemaking matters, and why it’s genuinely contested
The details written in regulations can determine what paperwork is required, what standards apply, what benefits are available, and how enforcement works. Supporters of agency rulemaking argue that agencies bring technical expertise and can update rules as science, markets, and public needs change. Critics argue that unelected officials can wield too much power, that compliance costs can be heavy, and that broad delegations let Congress avoid making hard choices itself. Both views reflect real, ongoing debates about how much authority agencies should hold.
