Accumulation of statutes: drowning in rules
PROTECTED CONTENT
If you’re a current subscriber, log in below. If you would like to subscribe, please click the subscribe tab above.
Username and Password Help
Please enter your email and we will send you a password reset link.
In the United States, a curious phenomenon of legal gravity is at play. Laws are constantly being passed, but they rarely, if ever, disappear. This creates an ever-growing, bewildering body of statutes and regulations that threaten to overwhelm both the public and the legal system itself. We are, in essence, drowning in rules, many of which are archaic, redundant, or just plain silly.
Billy Howard
Consider the sheer scale; since the first Congress convened in 1789, it has enacted tens of thousands of statutes. Today, the number of federal laws is estimated to be in the hundreds of thousands, with some sources citing as many as 300,000. And that’s just the number of federal statutes. This doesn’t include the millions of pages of regulations issued by a multitude of government agencies, or the countless laws on the books in all 50 states, counties, and municipalities. Each year, Congress may pass a few hundred new laws, but federal agencies issue thousands of new regulations. For example, in a recent year, federal agencies issued over 3,000 new rules, while Congress passed fewer than 200 laws. This imbalance is creating a legal landscape that is less a framework for society and more of a dense, impenetrable jungle.
The constant addition of new rules is driven by a number of factors, as every new social problem, technological advancement, and political controversy seems to require a legislative response. While some of these new laws are necessary and beneficial, many are simply knee-jerk reactions, hastily drafted and added to the proverbial “fertilizer pile” without a clear understanding of their long-term consequences. What’s more, once a law is on the books, it rarely leaves and, literally, takes an act of Congress on the rare occasion that does happen. The legislative process is designed to create, not to subtract. It’s far easier to pass a new law than it is to repeal an existing one. The result is a legal fossil record that preserves every legislative impulse, no matter how outdated.
The most bizarre and frustrating aspect of this legal accumulation is the sheer number of obsolete laws that persist. While many are not actively enforced, they remain technically valid, a testament to a bygone era. In Arizona, it’s illegal for a donkey to sleep in a bathtub. In Connecticut, a pickle must be able to bounce to be considered a pickle. In Arkansas, you can be fined for mispronouncing the state’s name. While these examples may be humorous, they highlight a serious problem. The fact that these laws are still on the books demonstrates a failure of the legal system to self-correct and a lack of political will to clean house.
This legal bloat isn’t just an academic problem as it has real-world consequences. For businesses, it means navigating a labyrinth of complex regulations that can stifle innovation and create unnecessary costs. For individuals, it can lead to confusion and the feeling that they could be inadvertently breaking a law they didn’t even know existed. A legal system that is not clear, concise, and accessible undermines the very principle of the rule of law. If citizens cannot reasonably be expected to know what is and isn’t against the law, how can they be expected to follow it?
The solution isn’t to stop creating new laws, but to create a legal system that is more dynamic and self-correcting. We need to find a way to make it easier to repeal outdated laws and regulations. Perhaps this situation warrants the need to establish a legal review board dedicated to culling the books, or create an expiration date for certain types of laws. Whatever the solution, it’s clear that the current model of constant addition without subtraction is unsustainable. It’s time to start de-cluttering our legal code before we find ourselves completely buried under it. I could be wrong but it’s just something to consider.
To pose a question, comment, or share your opinion about this opinion, you can reach Howard at bg@authorbghoward.com.
