Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Undoing Undue Favors: Providing Competitors With Standing To Challenge Favorable Irs Actions, Sunil Shenoi
Undoing Undue Favors: Providing Competitors With Standing To Challenge Favorable Irs Actions, Sunil Shenoi
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
The Internal Revenue Service occasionally creates rules, notices, or regulations that allow taxpayers to pay less than they would under a strict reading of the law. Sometimes, however, these IRS actions are directly contrary to federal law and have significant economic impact. Challenging favorable IRS actions through litigation will likely be unsuccessful because no plaintiff can satisfy the requirements for standing. To address this situation, this Note proposes a statutory reform to provide competitors with standing to challenge favorable IRS actions in court.
Carte Blanche For Cruelty: The Non-Enforcement Of The Animal Welfare Act, Katharine M. Swanson
Carte Blanche For Cruelty: The Non-Enforcement Of The Animal Welfare Act, Katharine M. Swanson
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
This Note explores both the judicial and administrative underenforcement of the Animal Welfare Act in protecting the welfare of laboratory animals used for purposes of experimentation. Specifically, the Note suggests that judicial underenforcement is borne as a result of the difficulties of lodging a private cause of action under the Act or gaining standing under the alternative statutory scheme of the Administrative Procedure Act. It further suggests administrative underenforcement in describing the promulgated regulations of the Act as inadequate and the lack of self-policing mechanisms. Finally, the Note suggests some ways that enforcement can be made more effective in these …
Loss Of Protection As Injury In Fact: An Approach To Establishing Standing To Challenge Environmental Planning Decisions, Miles A. Yanick
Loss Of Protection As Injury In Fact: An Approach To Establishing Standing To Challenge Environmental Planning Decisions, Miles A. Yanick
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
As currently interpreted by the United States Supreme Court, Article III of the Constitution creates a significant hurdle for plaintiff citizen groups seeking standing to challenge environmental planning or management decisions. In particular, plaintiffs have had difficulty in making the required showing of an 'injury in fact" where an agency has not yet approved a site-specific action but has approved only a general plan for an area to govern future site-specific actions. The Supreme Court has not articulated a clear rule for standing to challenge the latter type of agency decision making, and the courts of appeals for the various …