Americans for Prosperity Foundation

Congress rejected child care mandates, profit-sharing schemes, and stock buyback bans in the CHIPS Act. But the Commerce Department imposed them anyway.

After years of FOIA litigation, AFP Foundation uncovered documents showing how Secretary Raimondo used vague statutory language to push policies Congress explicitly voted down.

The Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision is a wake-up call: vague laws invite abuse. If Congress wants to stop unelected bureaucrats from rewriting policy, it must draft laws clearly and reclaim its constitutional authority.

Read more from AFPF’s Kevin Schmidt:

Op-Ed: Kevin Schmidt: How vague statutory language enabled the Biden administration’s CHIPS Act overreach, and what Congress must do next When Congress rejected sweeping child care subsidies in the Inflation Reduction Act, the Biden administration’s Commerce Secretary Gina Raimondo reportedly told her staff, “if Congress wasn’t going to do what they should have done, we’re going to do it in implementation.”

ICYMI: This week, AFP Foundation's John Tidwell spoke on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court during a pivotal moment for school choice.

The case at hand raises an important question: Should access to public education options be limited based on who operates the school?

How states approve and regulate charter schools plays a major role in shaping what families can access—and whether all students have the opportunity to learn in a setting that fits their needs.

School choice remains a key way to ensure that opportunity is as broad and diverse as the students seeking it.

ICYMI: AFP Foundation Speaks at SCOTUS Rally During Historic School Choice Case - AFPF WASHINGTON, D.C. – In case you missed it, Americans for Prosperity Foundation (AFPF)-Oklahoma State Director John Tidwell advocated for parental rights and school choice at a rally in front of the United States Supreme Court today during oral arguments for St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Virtual S...

When families speak out about their education options, it’s worth listening.

The case surrounding St. Isidore of Seville Catholic Charter School isn’t just about one school—it raises broader questions about how charter schools are approved and what criteria can or should limit a family’s access to public education alternatives.

How states handle charter authorizations can shape whether families have access to the environments that best meet their children’s needs. This is an important moment for understanding how policy decisions can impact educational opportunity.

'Bad for parents': School choice supporters protest exclusion of religious charter in Supreme Court case School choice advocates rally as the Supreme Court hears St. Isidore, a case that could allow public funds for religious charter schools—raising church and state concerns.