Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Interpreting Regulations, Kevin M. Stack
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 …
Do Investment Treaties Prescribe A Deferential Standard Of Review, Anna T. Katselas
Do Investment Treaties Prescribe A Deferential Standard Of Review, Anna T. Katselas
Michigan Journal of International Law
The dramatic rise in foreign investment in recent decades has brought with it a corresponding increase in the number of bilateral investment treaties (BITs) and, in turn, the number of international investment disputes arising under those treaties. Investment treaty arbitration is the predominant method used to settle those disputes and has certain advantages for both foreign investors and host states compared to available alternatives, but it can tread on delicate issues typically within the domaine rieservd of states. The concern about due regard for sovereign interests in this context is far from purely academic. In the past twenty years, the …
The Justiciability Of Fair Balance Under The Federal Advisory Committee Act: Toward A Deliberative Process Approach, Daniel E. Walters
The Justiciability Of Fair Balance Under The Federal Advisory Committee Act: Toward A Deliberative Process Approach, Daniel E. Walters
Michigan Law Review
The Federal Advisory Committee Act's requirement that advisory committees be "fairly balanced in terms of the points of view represented and the functions to be performed" is generally considered either nonjusticiable under the Administrative Procedure Act or justiciable but subject to highly deferential review. These approaches stem from courts' purported inability to discern from the text of the statute any meaningful legal standards for policing representational balance. Thus, the Federal Advisory Committee Act's most important substantive limitation on institutional pathologies such as committee "capture" or domination is generally unused despite the ubiquity of federal advisory committees in the modern regulatory …