# 119-hr-9277: To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act does not include any evidence that the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific principles and methods.

119-hr-9277, To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act does not include any evidence that the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific principles and methods., is a 119th Congress bill sponsored by Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large] (R-WY); status introduced (as of 2026-06-24).

- Canonical: https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-9277
- As of: 2026-06-24
- Plain-text twin of the page above; the HTML and this file carry the same facts.

## Facts
- Bill: 119-hr-9277
- Congress: 119
- Title: To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that judicial review under the Administrative Procedure Act does not include any evidence that the court determines is not the product of reliable scientific principles and methods.
- Status: introduced
- Introduced: 2026-06-11
- Sponsor: Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large] (R-WY)
- Cosponsors: 0
- Policy area: Government Operations and Politics
- Touches household money: no
- Last recorded action: 2026-06-24

## Summary

**Gives courts a clear new ground to reject agency actions supported by scientific evidence that courts find unreliable.** This bill would add a new subparagraph (G) to Section 706(2) of title 5, the Administrative Procedure Act, allowing judicial review when evidence is not produced using reliable scientific principles and methods or is not a reliable application of those methods. - Federal agencies would face tighter scrutiny when they rely on scientific studies for rules. Courts could overturn agency decisions if the underlying science or its application is judged unreliable. - Judges would get an explicit statutory basis to evaluate the scientific reliability of evidence during APA review. That shifts part of the debate from administrative deference to a factual reliability check. - Businesses, advocacy groups, and individuals could more easily challenge rules by arguing the agency's scientific support fails the new reliability test.

## Provisions PRIA read

- Courts can exclude unreliable science: mixed, high. If enacted, this bill would change how courts review federal agencies under the Administrative Procedure Act. It would add a rule letting courts exclude scientific evidence they find was not produced by reliable scientific methods or not reliably applied. This would make it easier to challenge rule…

## Related bills

- 119-hr-3330: Energy Freedom Act
- 119-hr-471: Fix Our Forests Act
- 119-hr-4706: Protecting Our Farms and Homes from China Act
- 119-hr-4206: CONNECT for Health Act of 2025
- 119-hr-1897: ESA Amendments Act of 2025
- 119-hr-1163: Prove It Act

## Sources
- [119-hr-9277 on Congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/9277)

## Related
- [119-hr-3330: Energy Freedom Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-3330)
- [119-hr-471: Fix Our Forests Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-471)
- [119-hr-4706: Protecting Our Farms and Homes from China Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-4706)
- [119-hr-4206: CONNECT for Health Act of 2025](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-4206)
- [119-hr-1897: ESA Amendments Act of 2025](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-1897)
- [119-hr-1163: Prove It Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-1163)
- [All bills in Congress](https://policyrisk.com/legislation)

Source: PRIA, https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-hr-9277 (as of 2026-06-24).