It’s a government policy that affects more Americans than unions and the minimum wage combined. Today, a staggering one out of every four American workers needs either an occupational license or certificate to do their jobs — a fivefold increase from the 1950s. According to one estimate, this dramatic surge in licensing costs Americans over $200 billion each year in higher prices as well as “up to 2.85 million fewer jobs nationwide.”

Fortunately, lawmakers are finally starting to address this massive obstacle to a flourishing labor market. Last week, 11 states announced that they will participate in an occupational licensing consortium on how to best remove barriers to entry. That announcement followed a congressional subcommittee hearing that discussed the nation’s deeply anticompetitive licensing boards.

Across the country, there are nearly 1,800 state licensing boards, regulating those who work as doctors and dentists as well as hair braiders, makeup artists and interior designers. In Louisiana, the Horticulture Commission even licenses roughly 2,000 florists throughout the state.

Adding insult to injury, many of those boards are directly controlled not by elected officials, but by individuals with a financial stake in what they regulate. According to research by Vanderbilt law professor Rebecca Allensworth, who testified at the hearing, “85 percent of state licensing boards are required by state statute to be comprised of a majority of currently licensed professionals.” As she put it, “These boards are formed, by law, as cartels.”

But thanks to a ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court, lawmakers have a new way to bust open those cartels. In its 2015 decision, North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, the court ruled that licensing boards, when dominated by so-called “active market participants,” can be sued under federal antitrust laws. However, boards can regain immunity from potentially expensive antitrust litigation if they fall under a state’s “active supervision,” though that was left vague.

Enter Congress. Under the Restoring Board Immunity Act, sponsored by Rep. Darrell Issa and Sens. Mike Lee, Ben Sasse and Ted Cruz, states could follow one of two paths to provide active supervision. For the first option, any enforcement actions or proposed regulations would have to be reviewed by an independent agency. Under the second option, states would have to beef up judicial review for licensing laws, since many courts have become rubber stamps for an ever-growing administrative state.

Regardless of the choice, occupational regulations would only be allowed if they truly protect “real, substantial threats to public health, safety or welfare.” Additionally, those regulations must be the “least restrictive” form — if lawmakers can protect the public with a less intrusive policy, they should.

Developed by the Institute for Justice, this framework recognizes that there are a variety of market-based and state-sponsored approaches to regulation short of licensing, which is the most restrictive. Consumers can instead rely on market competition and third-party reviews, while policymakers can require inspections, bonding or registration. The government can also create a certification for an occupation, which, like a license, acts as a signal, but is completely voluntary.

In addition, the RBI could provide a new way to achieve sweeping regulatory reforms. All too often, when a state lawmaker proposes scrapping multiple licenses and other regulatory bottlenecks, established businesses scurry to defend their turf. As the Institute for Justice detailed in a new book, these “bottleneckers” include trade associations, unions and any other special-interest groups who lobby to add or defend regulations that keep out their competitors.

Now that licensing boards can be sued (including for monetary damages), the RBI offers a powerful incentive for state legislators to stand up to bottleneckers. By reining in licensing boards, lawmakers can slash red tape, prevent federal lawsuits, cut costs for consumers and let entrepreneurs thrive. Passing the RBI would truly hit it out of the park.

Nick Sibilla is a legislative analyst at the Institute for Justice.