Law Commons^™

Mdl As Public Administration, David L. Noll

Michigan Law Review

From the Deepwater Horizon disaster to the opioid crisis, multidistrict litigation—or simply MDL—has become the preeminent forum for devising solutions to the most difficult problems in the federal courts. MDL works by refusing to follow a regular procedural playbook. Its solutions are case specific, evolving, and ad hoc. This very flexibility, however, provokes charges that MDL violates basic requirements of the rule of law.

At the heart of these charges is the assumption that MDL is simply a larger version of the litigation that takes place every day in federal district courts. But MDL is not just different in scale …

Chevron In The Circuit Courts, Kent Barnett, Christopher J. Walker

Michigan Law Review

This Article presents findings from the most comprehensive empirical study to date on how the federal courts of appeals have applied Chevrondeference— the doctrine under which courts defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute that it administers. Based on 1,558 agency interpretations the circuit courts reviewed from 2003 through 2013 (where they cited Chevron), we found that the circuit courts overall upheld 71% of interpretations and applied Chevrondeference 77% of the time. But there was nearly a twenty-five-percentage-point difference in agency-win rates when the circuit courts applied Chevrondeference than when they did …

A Comprehensive Administrative Solution To The Armed Career Criminal Act Debacle , Avi M. Kupfer

Michigan Law Review

For thirty years, the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”) has imposed a fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence on those people convicted as felons in possession of a firearm or ammunition who have three prior convictions for a violent felony or serious drug offense. Debate about the law has existed mainly within a larger discussion on the normative value of mandatory minimums. Assuming that the ACCA endures, however, administering it will continue to be a challenge. The approach that courts use to determine whether past convictions qualify as ACCA predicate offenses creates ex ante uncertainty and the potential for intercourt disparities. Furthermore, …

Interpreting Regulations, Kevin M. Stack

Michigan Law Review

The age of statutes has given way to an era of regulations, but our jurisprudence has fallen behind. Despite the centrality of regulations to law, courts have no intelligible approach to regulatory interpretation. The neglect of regulatory interpretation is not only a shortcoming in interpretive theory but also a practical problem for administrative law. Canonical doctrines of administrative law - Chevron, Seminole Rock/Auer, and Accardi - involve interpreting regulations, and yet courts lack a consistent approach. This Article develops a method for interpreting regulations and, more generally, situates regulatory interpretation within debates over legal interpretation. It argues that a purposive …

Unfit For Prime Time: Why Cable Television Regulations Cannot Perform Trinko's 'Antitrust Function', Keith Klovers

Michigan Law Review

Until recently, regulation and antitrust law operated in tandem to safeguard competition in regulated industries. In three recent decisions-Trinko, Credit Suisse, and Linkline-the Supreme Court limited the operation of the antitrust laws when regulation "performs the antitrust function." This Note argues that cable programming regulations-which are in some respects factually similar to the telecommunications regulations at issue in Trinko and Linkline-do not perform the antitrust function because they cannot deter anticompetitive conduct. As a result, Trinko and its siblings should not foreclose antitrust claims for damages that arise out of certain cable programming disputes.

Deconstructing 'Just And Proper': Arguments In Favor Of Adopting The 'Remedial Purpose' Approach To Section 10(J) Labor Injunctions, William K. Briggs

Michigan Law Review

Congress, through the 1947 addition of section 10(j) to the National Labor Relations Act, authorized district courts to grant preliminary injunctive relief for unfair labor practices if they deem such relief "just and proper." To this day a circuit split persists over the correct interpretation of this "just and proper" standard. Some circuits interpret "just and proper" to require application of the traditional equitable principles approach that normally governs preliminary injunctions. Other circuits interpret "just and proper" to require an analysis of whether injunctive relief is necessary to preserve the National Labor Relations Board's remedial power This Note examines the …

Super Deference, The Science Obsession, And Judicial Review As Translation Of Agency Science, Emily Hammond Meazell

Michigan Law Review

This Article explores what happens to longstanding remedies for past racial discrimination as conditions change. It shows that Congress and the Supreme Court have responded quite differently to changed conditions when they evaluate such remedies. Congress has generally opted to stay the course, while the Court has been more inclined to view change as cause to terminate a remedy. The Article argues that these very different responses share a defining flaw, namely, they treat existing remedies as fixed until they are terminated. As a result, remedies are either scrapped prematurely or left stagnant despite dramatically changed conditions. The Article seeks …

Public Participation In The Adoption Of Interpretive Rules And Policy Statements, Michael Asimow

Michigan Law Review

Section I of this article surveys the practices of a selected group of federal agencies in the adoption of interpretive rules and policy statements. It emphasizes the importance of these rules both to members of the public and to the administrative process. Section II analyzes the cases that have considered the AP A exemption of interpretive rules and policy statements from preadoption notice and comment procedures. These cases are in disarray for several reasons. For one thing, the bright lines traditionally assumed to distinguish interpretive rules and policy statements from legislative rules have become blurred and indistinct. Moreover, the courts …

Judicial Review Of Agency Action: The Unsettled Law Of Standing, Michigan Law Review

Michigan Law Review

Traditionally, the doctrine of standing has existed as the major obstacle frustrating the attempts of numerous plaintiffs to obtain relief for the injuries they have suffered as a result of allegedly illegal action by federal administrative agencies. Frequently, the rigid standards effectively have prevented any feasible plaintiff from challenging the actions of an administrative agency. The ultimate consequence of this problem has been practically to insulate a wide range of administrative activity from judicial review.

In recent years the courts have been under increasing pressure to liberalize the law of standing and to provide a judicial forum where administrative agencies …

Nonstatutory Review Of Federal Administrative Action: The Need For Statutory Reform Of Sovereign Immunity, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, And Parties Defendant, Roger C. Cramton

Michigan Law Review

The purpose of this Article is to generate support for three legislative proposals that will rectify the problems exemplified by the Gnotta case and hosts of other cases: (1) The elimination of the doctrine of sovereign immunity as a barrier to judicial review of federal administrative action; (2) a modest expansion of the subject matter jurisdiction of United States district courts to accommodate such review and, in addition, to provide a remedy against the United States for the resolution of property disputes; and (3) the total elimination of the remaining technicalities concerning the identification, naming, capacity, and joinder of parties …

Administrative Delay And Judicial Relief, Steven Goldman

Michigan Law Review

The problem of judicial relief from protracted agency delay has been virtually undiscussed in the existing literature. The few courts that have dealt with the delay question have acted instinctively, without providing any rational framework and without articulating either relevant concerns or appropriate standards. This Article will explore the range of issues raised when courts are called upon to grant relief from excessive administrative delay.