Digital Commons Network^™

State, Bd. Of Architecture V. Dist. Ct., 135 Nev. Adv. Op. 49, Melissa Yeghiazarian

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

The Court had two holdings in this case. First, a final decision for purposes of judicial review must contain a detailed finding of facts and conclusions of law by an administrative agency. Second, when a petition for judicial review is filed prematurely, it does not vest jurisdiction in the district court.

Tom Delay: Popular Constitutionalist?, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.

The Judicial Safeguards Of Federalism, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.

Reanimator: Mark Tushnet And The Second Coming Of The Imperial Presidency, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.

Tiers Of Scrutiny In A Hierarchical Judiciary, Tara Leigh Grove

Tara L. Grove

No abstract provided.

Judicial Review And Nongeneralizable Cases, Neal Devins, Alan J. Meese

Alan J. Meese

No abstract provided.

The Method In Fiduciary Law's Mixed Messages, Evan J. Criddle

Evan J. Criddle

No abstract provided.

Liberty In Loyalty: A Republican Theory Of Fiduciary Law, Evan J. Criddle

Evan J. Criddle

Conventional wisdom holds that the fiduciary duty of loyalty is a prophylactic rule that serves to deter and redress harmful opportunism. This idea can be traced back to the dawn of modern fiduciary law in England and the United States, and it has inspired generations of legal scholars to attempt to explain and justify the duty of loyalty from an economic perspective. Nonetheless, this Article argues that the conventional account of fiduciary loyalty should be abandoned because it does not adequately explain or justify fiduciary law’s core features.

The normative foundations of fiduciary loyalty come into sharper focus when viewed …

Chevron Deference And Treaty Interpretation, Evan J. Criddle

Evan J. Criddle

No abstract provided.

Inconsistent Standards Of Review In Last Term's Establishment Clause Cases, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.

Constitutional Rights Without Remedies: Judicial Review Of Underinclusive Legislation, Bruce K. Miller, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.

Congressional Factfinding And The Scope Of Judicial Review: A Preliminary Analysis, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.

Book Review Of The Second American Revolution, Neal Devins

Neal E. Devins

No abstract provided.

The Rhetorical Uses Of Marbury V. Madison: The Emergence Of A "Great Case", Davison M. Douglas

Davison M. Douglas

Marbury v. Madison is today indisputably one of the "great cases" of American constitutional law because of its association with the principle of judicial review. But for much of its history, Marbury has not been regarded as a seminal decision. Between 1803 and 1887, the Supreme Court never once cited Marbury for the principle of judicial review, and nineteenth century constitutional law treatises were far more likely to cite Marbury for the decision's discussion of writs of mandamus or the Supreme Court's original jurisdiction than for its discussion of judicial review. During the late nineteenth century, however, the exercise of …

When Is Finality Final? Second Chances At The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.

When Is Finality . . . Final? Rehearing And Resurrection In The Supreme Court, Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

No abstract provided.

Understanding The Politics Of Resentment: Of The Principles, Institutions, Counter-Strategies, Normative Change, And The Habits Of Heart, Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz

Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies

The paper asks, when is a constitutional design of any (domestic, international, supranational) polity in error? On the most general level, such a critical juncture occurs when a polity's founding document (treaty, convention, constitution) protects against dangers that no longer exist or does not protect against the dangers that were not contemplated by the founders. Constitutions not only rule but should also protect against deconstitution. When analyzed together, the cases of Hungary, Poland, South America, and more recently, the United States, suggest a worrying new pattern of the erosion of constitutional democracies. One may even speak of a recipe for …

Judicial Review And Constitutional Interpretation In Afghanistan: A Case Of Inconsistency, Shoaib Timory

Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Review

No abstract provided.

Enforcing Principled Constitutional Limits On Federal Power: A Neo-Federalist Refinement Of Justice Cardozo's Jurisprudence, Robert J. Pushaw Jr.

William & Mary Law Review

Since the New Deal of the mid-1930s, Congress has asserted virtually absolute power to (1) “regulate Commerce ... among the States,” (2) tax and spend for the “general Welfare,” and (3) delegate “legislative Power[ ]” to the executive branch. From 1937 until 1994, the Supreme Court rejected every claim that such statutes had exceeded Congress’s Article I authority and usurped the states’ reserved powers under the Tenth Amendment. Over the past quarter century, conservative Justices have tried, and failed, to develop principled constitutional limits on the federal government while keeping the modern administrative and social welfare state largely intact.

The …

Beyond Samuel Moyn's Countermajoritatian Difficulty As A Model Of Global Judicial Review, James T. Gathii

Faculty Publications & Other Works

This Article responds to Samuel Moyn's critique of judicial review and his endorsement of judicial modesty as an alternative. By invoking the countermajoritarian difficulty, Moyn argues that judicial overreach has become an unwelcome global phenomenon that should be reexamined and curbed. I reject Moyn's claim that this kind of judicial modesty should define the role of courts for all time. By applying the countermajoritarian difficulty beyond its United States origins, Moyn assumes it is an unproblematic baseline against which to measure the role of courts globally. Moyn's vision says nothing about when it would be appropriate for courts to rule …

Sticks, Stones, And So-Called Judges: Why The Era Of Trump Necessitates Revisiting Presidential Influence On The Courts, Quinn W. Crowley

Indiana Law Journal

This Note will be primarily divided into three main sections. Part I of this Note will begin by discussing the importance of judicial independence in modern society and the role of elected officials in shaping the public perception of the courts. Additionally, as problems of judicial legitimacy are age-old and date back to America’s founding, Part I will include a brief discussion of an early clash between President Thomas Jefferson and the courts.

Parts II and III of this Note will seek to place President Trump’s conduct towards the judicial branch within the proper historical context. Part II examines the …

The Regulatory Accountability Act And The Future Of Apa Revision, Ronald M. Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

This article seeks to take stock of the Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA), a set of proposals to amend the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). House and Senate versions of the proposed Act have been pending in Congress since 2011, although the impending advent of Democratic control of the House may halt further progress on the bills in their present form. Some provisions in the RAA are desirable or at least supportable, because they would codify elements of current practice or make minor repairs to the APA. But other aspects of the bill are controversial and troubling. Among them are sections that …

Teacher For The Nation, Daniel Epps

Scholarship@WashULaw

In these brief remarks, delivered at the Hastings Law Journal's Symposium on the Jurisprudence of Justice Kennedy, I discuss Justice Kennedy's impact on American law. I reflect on the events that led to Justice Kennedy's appointment to the Supreme Court and discuss his vision of the Justices as teachers for the nation and how that vision seems to have informed his view of judicial review.

Liberty And Separation Of Powers In Judicial Review Of Privatized Governance Regimes, Jeffrey Kleeger

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

This article examines the power difference between homeowner association (HOA) owners, members, and their governing boards. Administrative adjudication can remedy the imbalance to better secure member rights. What is necessary is a heightened standard of judicial review and a requirement to produce a comprehensive record for review. Boards enjoy an advantage in disputes with members—courts uphold board actions unless they are arbitrary and capricious. Boards also possess largely unrestricted state-delegated authority to make and enforce rules, as well as decide penalties for infractions. These clearly governmental functions are not restrained by the state action doctrine. Tools of administrative adjudication are …

The Politics Of Selecting Chevron Deference, Kent H. Barnett, Christina L. Boyd, Christopher J. Walker

Scholarly Works

In this article, we examine an important threshold question in judicial behavior and administrative law: When do federal circuit courts decide to use the Chevron deference framework and when do they select a framework that is less deferential to the administrative agency's statutory interpretation? The question is important because the purpose of Chevron deference is to give agencies-not judges-policy-making space within statutory interpretation. We expect, nonetheless, that whether to invoke the Chevron framework is largely driven by political dynamics, with judges adopting a less deferential standard when their political preferences do not align with the agency's decision. To provide insight, …

Congressional Standing To Sue: The Role Of Courts And Congress In U.S. Constitutional Democracy, Vicki C. Jackson

Indiana Law Journal

In recent years, legislatures and their members have increasingly asserted standing to sue other branches of government, in controversies involving state legislators or legislatures as party litigants and in controversies involving members of or parts of the U.S. Congress. These cases present challenging questions for the federal Article III courts, whose jurisdiction has been interpreted to be bounded by “justiciability” doctrines, including that the party invoking federal court jurisdiction must have standing to do so. This Essay will focus on congressional standing, discussing case law involving claims by state legislatures or legislators to the extent they are relevant.1 It will …

Judicial Review Of Government Actions In China, Wei Cui, Jie Cheng, Dominika Wiesner

All Faculty Publications

China’s laws and policies on the judicial review of government actions are often used as a bellwether of the government’s attitude towards the rule of law. Accordingly, in gauging the direction of legal reform in the Xi Jinping era, recent media reports have highlighted changes in litigation against government agencies as evidence of positive movement towards the greater rule of law, albeit only contradicted by other evidence of political repression and increasing authoritarianism. We provide a selective review of changes in China’s administrative litigation system in the last few years, including the amendment in 2014 of the Administrative Litigation Law …

Delegating For Trust, Edward H. Stiglitz

Cornell Law Faculty Publications

Courts and legal observers have long been concerned by the scope of authority delegated to administrative agencies. The dominant explanation of delegated authority is that it is necessary to take advantage of administrative agencies' expertise and expansive rulemaking capacity. Though this explanation makes sense in many settings, it falters in many areas and has given rise to a number of longstanding puzzles, such as why Congress does not invest in its own institutional capacity.

Unrecognized in this debate over the puzzles of delegation is that Congress may delegate to take advantage of another distinctive attribute of administrative decisionmaking: the credible …

Heat & Frost Insulators & Allied Workers Loc. 16 V. Lab. Comm’R; Univ. Of Nev., Reno; & Core Constr., 134 Nev. Adv. Op. 1 (Jan. 4, 2018), Alma Orozco

Nevada Supreme Court Summaries

NRS 233B.130(2)(c)(1)’s service requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional. Further, under NRS 233B.130(5), the district court has jurisdiction to extend time for service for good cause, either before or after the 45-day service period has run.

Curbing Remedies For Official Wrongs: The Need For Bivens Suits In National Security Cases, Peter Margulies

Law Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.