Beltway Buzz, October 17, 2025

Shutdown 2025 Update. Today is day seventeen of the 2025 federal government shutdown, and there is no clear political path to reopening. To date, the U.S. Senate has tried—unsuccessfully, ten times—to adopt a continuing resolution to reopen the federal government at current funding levels. Senators John Fetterman (D-PA), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-NV), and Angus King (I-ME) continue to vote “yea” on the resolution, while Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) continues to vote “nay.” Republicans are hoping to convince five more Democrats to vote with them. Potential developments that could impact negotiations are as follows:

• Earlier this week, the recently renamed U.S. Department of War reallocated money from other programs to ensure that active-duty military personnel received their paychecks on October 15, 2025, temporarily muting a potential catalyst for negotiations. Looking ahead, October 31, 2025, is the next scheduled payday for the military, and early reports indicate that the War Department might not be able to find the money to make that happen.
• The U.S Department of Agriculture has reportedly notified state agencies that Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funds may run out in November. This could be another critical factor in bringing both sides to the negotiating table.
• As the shutdown drags on, federal employees who have been furloughed or laid off could also become more vocal, putting more pressure on senators to strike a deal. In the meantime, this week, a federal district court in California issued a temporary restraining order blocking the administration from implementing certain reduction-in-force (RIF) notices or issuing new RIF notices.
• There has been no updated guidance on the functions of the federal courts, which, after October 17, 2025, will be operating on a court-by-court basis as “necessary to support the exercise of Article III judicial powers.”

E-Verify Resumes Operations. Not all government shutdowns are alike. For example, while it is normally unavailable during government shutdowns, E-Verify is now up and running after being shuttered at the start of the current shutdown. Importantly, participating employers were required to create new E-Verify cases by October 14, 2025, for employees who were hired while the system was down. Andrew G. Drozdowski has the details.

Drawn-Out Legal Challenge to H-4 Work Authorization Comes to an End. This week, a ten-year immigration court battle came to an end when the Supreme Court of the United States declined to hear a case challenging the validity of the 2015 H-4 EAD (employment authorization document) rule. By doing so, the Court left in place a 2024 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, holding that the Obama-era H-4 EAD regulation, which provides work authorization to certain H-4 dependent spouses, was a valid exercise of authority granted to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security pursuant to the Immigration and Nationality Act.

During President Donald Trump’s first term, a proposal to rescind the H-4 regulation was placed on the regulatory agenda, but that proposal was never issued and was pulled by the Biden administration. The current Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions does not include an entry for revisiting the H-4 EAD rule. However, given the Trump administration’s current immigration policy positions, a proposed rule limiting or rescinding the rule is always a possibility.

California Law Regulates Private-Sector Labor Matters; NLRB Sues. California Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed into law Assembly Bill (AB) No. 288, and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) wasn’t too impressed. Thomas M. Stanek, Charles L. Thompson, IV, and Zachary V. Zagger have the details on the law, which permits California’s Public Employee Relations Board (PERB) to conduct private-sector union elections, process private-sector unfair labor practice charges, and order remedies when the Board declines to assert jurisdiction. As it did with a similar New York statute, the NLRB quickly sued the State of California, alleging that the statute is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act.

Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA), chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), does not appear to be too impressed with California, either, as expressed in an October 15, 2025, letter he sent to Governor Newsom, demanding information related to the enactment of AB 288. Cassidy writes, “Infringing on NLRB’s jurisdiction undermines processes enshrined in federal law that protect workers and falsely suggests to workers that PERB decisions can provide a legal resolution.” The letter also poses a series of questions to Governor Newsom regarding how the expansion of PERB’s jurisdiction will work on a practical level. Of course, while the U.S. Congress has oversight of federal agencies, it has no such authority over state governments, so Governor Newsom might not be so forthcoming with a response.

Workin’ on the Railroad.  This week marks the forty-fifth anniversary of the enactment of the Staggers Rail Act. The act corrected a decades old freight railroad regulatory system that set a complex rate scheme and constrained railroads from restructuring (e.g., establishing new profitable lines or abandoning nonprofitable lines). Combined with the post-World War II growth of interstate highways and air travel, this regulatory system led many railroads to go out of business. Championed by sixteen-term West Virginia Congressman Harley Orrin Staggers, the act cut these regulations and provided railroads the flexibility to negotiate rates and adjust their services to respond to market conditions. The Staggers Rail Act is often credited with lowering shipping rates, allowing railroads to reinvest in infrastructure, and generally saving the freight rail industry.