Donald Trump signs an executive order that requires that for every new federal regulation implemented, two must be rescinded. (Photo by Andrew Harrer, Pool/Getty Images)

As the courts become an action-packed battleground in the early days of the Donald Trump administration, yet another lawsuit is challenging another executive order. This time, three groups are arguing that Trump’s mandate that two regulations be repealed for every one enacted is unconstitutional.

Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Communications Workers of America filed the suit on Wednesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

“When presidents overreach, it is up to the courts to remind them no one is above the law and hold them to the U.S. Constitution,” said Patti Goldman, an attorney with Earthjustice, in a statement. The nonprofit environmental law organization is among the groups representing the plaintiffs.

Trump signed the executive order on Jan. 30, pledging that it will clear the way for economic growth. “There will be regulation, there will be control, but it will be a normalized control where you can open your business and expand your business very easily,” the president said, as small business owners looked on.

The order requires federal agencies to cut two current regulations for every one enacted, and mandates any new regulations should not add any net cost.

Today’s suit argues that such a requirement exceeds the president’s constitutional authority and violates both the statutes that federal agencies operate under and the Administrative Procedure Act, which prohibits arbitrary rulemaking.

“To repeal two regulations for the purpose of adopting one new one, based solely
on a directive to impose zero net costs and without any consideration of benefits, is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law,” the suit argues.

“New efforts to stop pollution don’t automatically make old ones unnecessary. When you make policy by tweet, it yields irrational rules,” said NRDC President Rhea Suh in a statement. “This order imposes a false choice between clean air, clean water, safe food, and other environmental safeguards.”

The suit is now one of more than 50 legal challenges to Trump’s early orders making their way through the court system. In their first two weeks in office, Presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama each only faced four or five. The vast majority involve Trump’s executive order on refugees and travel, including one in Virginia, but others involve civil rights, immigration more generally, financial conflicts of interest, and sanctuary cities, according to NPR.

After the disastrous roll-out of the travel ban—and the elevation of Steve Bannon to a seat on the National Security Council thanks to an order that the president didn’t fully understand but signed nevertheless—the administration is reportedly rethinking the process by which it issues executive actions, the New York Times reports. That will involve slowing down and giving more senior and mid-level officials the opportunity to weigh in, according to the Weekly Standard. Department of Homeland Security staff were left in the dark about the details of the travel ban until the very last minute.

‘One-In, Two-Out’ Executive Order Lawsuit by RachelSadon on Scribd