Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Accountability (1)
- Adjudication (1)
- Administrative adjudication (1)
- Administrative law (1)
- Chae Chan Ping (1)
-
- Chevron (1)
- Chevron deference (1)
- Cigarette Smoking (1)
- City of Arlington (1)
- Communitarian doctrine (1)
- Comparative law (1)
- Congressional Menthol Exemption (1)
- Delay rationale (1)
- Department of Veterans Affairs (1)
- Deportation (1)
- European Convention on Human Rights (1)
- FSPTCA (1)
- Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (1)
- Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (1)
- Food and Drug Administration (1)
- Human Rights Act (1)
- INS v. St. Cyr (1)
- Immgration reform (1)
- Immigration (1)
- Judicial reform (1)
- Justice Scalia (1)
- Mathews v. Eldridge (1)
- Menthol (1)
- National Association of Tobacco Outlets v. City of Providence (1)
- Plenary power (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Enhancing Accountability At The Department Of Veterans Affairs: The Legality Of The Veterans Access, Choice, And Accountability Act Of 2014 Under The Due Process Clause, Ashton Habighurst
Enhancing Accountability At The Department Of Veterans Affairs: The Legality Of The Veterans Access, Choice, And Accountability Act Of 2014 Under The Due Process Clause, Ashton Habighurst
Catholic University Law Review
In April 2014, news of long delays at the Phoenix VA Medical Center and the subsequent deaths of forty Veterans awaiting medical appointments shocked the nation. Based on this perceived failure among VA’s senior medical staff, legislation swept through the House and the Senate in an attempt to enhance accountability at the VA. By August 2014, President Obama signed the Veterans Access, Choice and Accountability Act of 2014 into law. This Act revises the termination procedures concerning the VA’s senior executives, by eliminating the notice requirement, significantly reducing the appellate procedures for adverse employment decision to the Merit Systems Protection …
The Minty Taste Of Death: State And Local Options To Regulate Menthol In Tobacco Products, Michael Freiberg
The Minty Taste Of Death: State And Local Options To Regulate Menthol In Tobacco Products, Michael Freiberg
Catholic University Law Review
Explaining why the additive menthol in tobacco products creates major public health risks, this article advocates for restricting the addition of menthol in cigarettes as a way to reduce smoking-related disease and death. Author Michael Freiberg describes how the decision to regulate menthol in tobacco products, on a federal level, was historically delegated by Congress to the discretion of the U.S. FDA, outlines the U.S. FDA’s subsequent failure to regulate menthol, and surveys state and local government efforts to regulate menthol in response to the FDA’s inaction. The article proposes additional actions that these state and local governments could take …
Chevron'S Legacy, Justice Scalia's Two Enigmatic Dissents, And His Return To The Fold In City Of Arlington, Tex. V. Fcc, Stephen J. Leacock
Chevron'S Legacy, Justice Scalia's Two Enigmatic Dissents, And His Return To The Fold In City Of Arlington, Tex. V. Fcc, Stephen J. Leacock
Catholic University Law Review
The creation by the judiciary of the doctrine of Chevron deference to administrative agencies’ determinations, followed by the judiciary’s application and supervision of the Chevron deference doctrine in Administrative Law continue. Protection by the judiciary of the evolution of the doctrine also continues as an integral component of the judiciary’s contribution to the central objective of the three coequal branches of government to achieve for the United States a more perfect union. However, synergistic cooperation between the three branches in order to achieve that central objective requires that each branch honor its own constitutional obligation under the United States Constitution …
Removing The Distraction Of Delay, Jill E. Family
Removing The Distraction Of Delay, Jill E. Family
Catholic University Law Review
Immigration adjudication is in an awkward position. There is an intricate system to adjudicate immigration removal (deportation) cases, but that system is hindered by restrictions, and the constant threat of further restrictions, that reflect distaste for providing process to foreign nationals facing removal. There is a push and pull phenomenon, with immigration adjudication stretched uncomfortably in between two forces. On the one side, there is a push to apply common notions of due process to immigration removal cases, to push that the same concepts of procedural justice should apply in immigration cases as they would in any other context. On …