Law Commons^™

Center For Biological Diversity V. Zinke, Ryan Hickey

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The oft-cited “arbitrary and capricious” standard revived the Center for Biological Diversity’s most recent legal challenge in its decades-long quest to see arctic grayling listed under the Endangered Species Act. While this Ninth Circuit decision did not grant grayling ESA protections, it did require the United States Fish and Wildlife Service to reconsider its 2014 finding that listing grayling as threatened or endangered was unwarranted. In doing so, the court found “range,” as used in the ESA, vague while endorsing the FWS’s 2014 clarification of that term. Finally, this holding identified specific shortcomings of the challenged FWS finding, highlighting how …

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. …

The Death Of Judicial Independence In Turkey: A Lesson For Others, Edwin L. Felter Jr., Oyku Didem Aydin

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Administrative Constitutionalism And The Unity Of Public Law, Matthew Lewans

Osgoode Hall Law Journal

Public law scholarship in the common law tradition often aims at elucidating a connection between law and constitutional values like equality, due process, and the rule of law. However, in their quest to reveal the morality of public law, common lawyers often focus their attention on judicial interpretations of constitutional values to the exclusion of other sources of constitutional jurisprudence. The author argues that the traditional fascination with courts as the primary or exclusive arbiters of constitutional values should be tempered and supplemented by recognizing the valuable contributions of administrative officials who interpret and enforce constitutional norms when exercising statutorily …

The Burden Of A Good Idea: Examining The Impact Of Unfunded Federal Regulatory Mandates On Medicare Participating Hospitals, Rachel J. Suddarth

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

No abstract provided.

Pepperdine University School Of Law Legal Summaries, Armando Lopez

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Ignoring Administrative Decisions Through Settlement: A Holistic Approach, Vincent Escoto

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Default License Revocation In California Administrative Law, Jacob Reinhardt

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

If Established By Law, Then An Administrative Judge Is An Officer, Jennifer L. Cotton

Georgia Law Review

Administrative Judges (AJs) are a large and often overlooked group of federal agency adjudicators. While courts have examined Article II Appointments Clause challenges to Administrative Law Judges (ALJs), courts have yet to encounter a legal challenge to the constitutionality of AJs’ appointment procedures. The constitutionality of any federal government actor’s appointment is dependent upon whether that actor is an “officer” or an “employee” under the Article II Appointments clause. It is apparent that the current “significant authority” test that the Supreme Court has espoused to distinguish between officers and employees is unworkable. This Note endeavors to set forth a bright-line …

Panel Effects In Administrative Law: A Study Of Rules, Standards, And Judicial Whistleblowing, Morgan Hazelton, Kristin E. Hickman, Emerson Tiller

SMU Law Review

In this article, we consider whether “panel effects”—that is, the condition where the presence, or expected voting behavior, of one judge on a judicial panel influences the way another judge, or set of judges, on the same panel votes—varies depending upon the form of the legal doctrine. In particular, we ask whether the hand of an ideological minority appellate judge (that is, a Democrat-appointed judge with two Republican appointees or a Republican-appointed judge with two Democrat appointees) is strengthened by the existence of a legal doctrine packaged in the form of a rule rather than a standard. Specifically, we unbundle …

Non-Alj Adjudicators In Federal Agencies: Status, Selection, Oversight, And Removal, Kent H. Barnett, Russell Wheeler

Georgia Law Review

This article republishes—in substantively similar form—our 2018 report to the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) concerning federal agencies’ adjudicators who are not administrative law judges (ALJs). (We refer to these adjudicators as “non-ALJ Adjudicators” or “non-ALJs.”) As our data indicate, non-ALJs significantly outnumber ALJs. Yet non-ALJs are often overlooked and difficult to discuss as a class because of their disparate titles and characteristics. To obtain more information on non-ALJs, we surveyed agencies on non-ALJs’ hearings and, among other things, the characteristics concerning non-ALJs’ salaries, selection, oversight, and removal. We first present our reported data on these matters, which …

Quacks Or Bootleggers: Who’S Really Regulating Hedge Funds?, Jeremy Kidd

Washington and Lee Law Review

Influential scholars of corporate law have questioned previous federal interventions into corporate governance, calling it quackery. Invoking images of medical malpractice, these critiques have argued persuasively that Congress, in responding to crises, makes policy that disrupts efficient private rules and established state laws. This Article applies the Bootleggers and Baptists theory to show that Dodd–Frank’s hedge fund rules are more than just negligent or reckless, but designed to benefit special interests that compete with the hedge fund model. Those rules offer no solutions to any real or perceived risks arising from hedge fund investing, but might offer an advantage to …

The Supreme Court Puts The Brakes On Cuozzo Speed Technologies: Investigating The Intersection Of Administrative Law And The Judiciary, Jason Kuchar

Cybaris®

No abstract provided.