Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Administrative Law (4)
- Courts (2)
- Environmental Law (2)
- Legislation (2)
- Agency (1)
-
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Gaming Law (1)
- Indigenous, Indian, and Aboriginal Law (1)
- International Law (1)
- Judges (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Military, War, and Peace (1)
- National Security Law (1)
- Natural Resources Law (1)
- Organizations Law (1)
- President/Executive Department (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States (1)
- Institution
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Judicial Review In An Age Of Hyper-Polarization And Alternative Facts, David A. Dana, Michael Barsa
Judicial Review In An Age Of Hyper-Polarization And Alternative Facts, David A. Dana, Michael Barsa
San Diego Journal of Climate & Energy Law
This Article is organized as follows: Part I reviews the case law and commentary on judicial review of agency shifts in policy or practice, focusing on the technocratic case for deference and how recent political realities call such deference into question. Part II sets forth the background and history regarding fuel economy standards, leading to the Obama Administration’s adoption of standards in 2012 and the “midterm” review of those standards that Obama’s EPA declared final as of January 2017. Part II also reviews the legal issues surrounding Trump’s EPA’s “re-opening” of the midterm review. We suggest how courts could, and …
Agency Pragmatism In Addressing Law’S Failure: The Curious Case Of Federal “Deemed Approvals” Of Tribal-State Gaming Compacts, Kevin K. Washburn
Agency Pragmatism In Addressing Law’S Failure: The Curious Case Of Federal “Deemed Approvals” Of Tribal-State Gaming Compacts, Kevin K. Washburn
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
In the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA), Congress imposed a decision-forcing mechanism on the Secretary of the Interior related to tribal-state compacts for Indian gaming. Congress authorized the Secretary to review such compacts and approve or disapprove each compact within forty-five days of submission. Under an unusual provision of law, however, if the Secretary fails to act within forty-five days, the compact is “deemed approved” by operation of law but only to the extent that it is lawful. In a curious development, this regime has been used in a different manner than Congress intended. Since the United States …
Endangered Deference: Separation Of Powers And Judicial Review Of Agency Interpretation, Kathryn M. Baldwin
Endangered Deference: Separation Of Powers And Judicial Review Of Agency Interpretation, Kathryn M. Baldwin
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
This Note proceeds in four parts: Part I consists of a brief history of the development of agency deference doctrine. Part II examines the decline of deference from the perspective of all three branches of government: the overuse by the executive agency that catalyzed deference’s denouement, the underuse by the United States Supreme Court and renewed separation of powers challenges, and the parallel assault from Congress under the pending SOPRA. Part III addresses the proposed de novo review standard and highlights the deficiencies in that solution, emphasizing instead the tools that Congress already employs to meaningfully check agency interpretations. …
In Defense Of A Little Judiciary: A Textual And Constitutional Foundation For Chevron, Terence J. Mccarrick Jr.
In Defense Of A Little Judiciary: A Textual And Constitutional Foundation For Chevron, Terence J. Mccarrick Jr.
San Diego Law Review
This Article hopes to help fill that “important gap in the administrative law literature.” And it proceeds in three parts. Part II offers a brief history of the Chevron doctrine and its discontents. It traces the doctrine’s origin and scope and ends by articulating the textualist and originalist critique of Chevron described above. Part III grapples with that criticism and offers a textualist and originalist defense of Chevron. Section III.A describes the textual footing for Chevron in the APA and argues that Chevron—if not commanded by the APA—does not upset the role it envisions for courts. Section III.B describes the …
Native Ecosystems Council V. Marten, Rebecca A. Newsom
Native Ecosystems Council V. Marten, Rebecca A. Newsom
Public Land & Resources Law Review
In Native Ecosystems Council v. Marten, the Ninth Circuit found that the United States Forest Service did not violate the Endangered Species Act, National Forest Management Act, or National Environmental Policy Act, when it proposed the Lonesome Wood Vegetation Management 2 Project in the Gallatin National Forest of Montana, even though the decision was inconsistent with the United States Forest Service’s reports. The Ninth Circuit’s holding demonstrated the wide amount of deference the courts will give the Forest Service when determining the best available scientific data.
International Courts Improve Public Deliberation, Shai Dothan
International Courts Improve Public Deliberation, Shai Dothan
Michigan Journal of International Law
The paper starts with the effects of international courts on the broader public and narrows down to their influence on a small elite of lawyers. Part I suggests that international courts captivate the public imagination, allowing citizens to articulate their rights. Part II demonstrates how governments, parliaments, and national courts around the world interact with international courts in ways that improve public deliberation. Part III studies the global elite of lawyers that work in conjunction with international courts to shape policy. Part IV concludes by arguing that the dialogue fostered between international courts and democratic bodies does, in fact, lead …
The Virtues Of Abstention: Separation Of Powers In Al-Nashiri Ii, Nicholas A. Dimarco
The Virtues Of Abstention: Separation Of Powers In Al-Nashiri Ii, Nicholas A. Dimarco
St. John's Law Review
(Excerpt)
Part I examines various scholarly approaches to judicial deference, then considers deference in the context of military commissions. In Part II, the history of military commissions in the United States is examined, paying particular attention to the extended dialogue among the coordinate federal branches that created the system currently in operation. The decision in Al-Nashiri II not to adjudicate a collateral attack on one of these commissions is the focus of Part III. That Part embraces the underlying jurisdictional challenge at stake in Al-Nashiri II, the development of abstention doctrine generally and as applied to the current commissions, …