Law Commons^™

Nondelegation And The Legislative Versus Administrative Exactions Divide: Why Legislatively Imposed Exactions Do Not Require A More Searching Standard Of Review, Hunter Dominick

Fordham Law Review

As the United States continues to grow and urbanize, local governments have tried to manage this growth to mitigate the external impacts that new developments can cause. One method by which state and local governments seek to control growth within their borders is by imposing conditions on the issuance of building permits—otherwise known as exactions. Exactions, however, face federal constitutional limits under the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment, which applies to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment.

In Nollan v. California Coastal Commission and Dolan v. City of Tigard, the U.S. Supreme Court restricted exactions in …

“Major” Challenges For Lower Courts: Inconsistent Applications Of The Major Questions Doctrine In Lower Courts After West Virginia V. Environmental Protection Agency, Sarah A. Schmoyer

Fordham Law Review

Under the major questions doctrine, an agency requires clear congressional authorization to regulate on an issue of major national significance. Although a version of the doctrine has existed for several years, its rise in importance is recent. The U.S. Supreme Court invoked the doctrine by name for the first time in 2022 in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, warning that in certain “extraordinary cases,” the “history and the breadth” and the “economic and political significance” of the agency action may “provide a reason to hesitate” before accepting the agency’s authority. West Virginia has since inspired a wave of …

Ending Exemption 5 Expansion: Toward A Narrower Interpretation Of Foia’S Exemption For Inter- And Intra-Agency Memorandums, Ryan W. Miller

Fordham Law Review

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) creates a judicially enforceable right to access almost any record that a federal agency creates or obtains. Its crafters aimed to strike a careful balance in promoting disclosure of government records to increase transparency while still protecting the confidentiality of certain information. Although any person can request an agency record, FOIA’s nine exemptions allow agencies to withhold records if certain conditions are met. 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(5) permits agencies to withhold “inter-agency or intra-agency memorandums or letters” that would normally be privileged in civil discovery. Through this exemption, Congress sought to prevent FOIA from …

Improving Lawyers & Lives: How Immigrant Justice Corps Built A Model For Quality Representation While Empowering Recent Law School And College Graduates And The Immigrant Communities Whom They Serve, Jojo Annobil, Elizabeth Gibson

Fordham Law Review

The late Judge Robert A. Katzmann of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit formed a study group in 2008 called the Study Group on Immigrant Representation to assess the scope of the problem and find a solution. The study group determined that the representation crisis was an issue “of both quality and quantity” and that the two most important variables for a successful outcome in a case were having counsel and not being detained. To address this need, the study group established two innovative programs: the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project (NYIFUP), the first public defender …

Expert Knowledge, Democratic Accountability, And The Unitary Executive, Barry Sullivan

Fordham Law Review

Proponents of the “unitary executive” theory hold that “all federal officers exercising executive power must be subject to the direct control of the President.” But how, as a constitutional matter, should such presidential control be defined, and how should it be effectuated? Unitarians are not united. Kevin H. Rhodes and Professor Steven G. Calabresi identify at least three distinct versions of the theory, which reflect a diversity of responses to those questions. The strongest or most aggressive version (which may also find the least support in the relevant jurisprudence) holds that the President may “supplant any discretionary executive action taken …

Concerted Civic Administration, Peter M. Shane

Fordham Law Review

With the benefit of hindsight, the Roberts Court’s decision in Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board marked the arrival in the U.S. Supreme Court of what has aptly been called the “separation-of-powers counterrevolution.” For the first time in history, the Court voided statutory criteria limiting the removability of a subordinate officer by a principal officer within the executive branch. Since then, the Court has crafted an increasingly complex separation-of-powers jurisprudence aimed at protecting the President’s supposed Article II authority to control subordinate administrators. Underlying this jurisprudence is the Court’s supposition that, constitutionally speaking, executive branch administrators “wield …

The President's Fourth Branch?, Bijal Shah

Fordham Law Review

Unitary executive theory has taken hold of the administrative state, motivated by the view that agencies constitute a rogue fourth branch of government. Emboldened by the U.S. Supreme Court, the President has begun to interfere with administrative accountability to important criteria including statutory procedural requirements that impact both public participation and administrative due process, the expectation that agencies engage neutral expertise to implement the law, and the obligations of judicial review. As a result, this Essay argues, rather than constituting a fourth branch that is unaccountable to the President, the administrative state has been encouraged by the President and courts …

The Diffuse Executive, Anya Bernstein, Cristina Rodriguez

Fordham Law Review

A unitary executive is an exacting ideal. It asks that all power in an administration be gathered in the person of the President, who should have full authority to determine the actions of officials and employees. Even if the President does not directly control every executive action (how could he?), when officials fail to implement presidential preferences, the unitary theory dictates that the President must have the power to remove them. The model posits a tightly organized hierarchy—every rung implementing the substantive decisions of the rung above, with orders flowing from the top: a command-and-control structure for government action. And, …

Article Iii, The Bill Of Rights, And Administrative Adjudication, John M. Golden, Thomas H. Lee

Fordham Law Review

Modern reconsideration of legal constraints on the federal administrative state has commonly focused on agency rulemaking but seems increasingly concerned with agency adjudication. In this Essay, we provide an overview of constitutional issues implicated by administrative adjudication. We specifically explain how and why the so-called public-rights doctrine generally allows federal administrative adjudication outside private-rights actions substantially linked to traditional actions in law, equity, or admiralty. We also discuss how constitutional provisions outside Article III—including Bill of Rights protections of individuals as against the federal government—may nonetheless require a role for Article III courts even in so called public rights cases, …

Police Officers, Policy, And Personnel Files: Prosecutorial Disclosure Obligations Above And Beyond Brady, Lauren Giles

Fordham Law Review

Police officers play a significant role in the criminal trial process and are unlike any other witness who will take the stand. They are trained to testify, and jurors find them more credible than other witnesses, even though officers may have more incentive to lie than the ordinary witness. Despite the role of police officers in criminal proceedings, state statutes say virtually nothing about evidence used to impeach police officers, often contained in the officer’s personnel file. Worse still, the standard for disclosing information in an officer’s personnel file varies among and within states, resulting in inconsistent Brady disclosures. This …

Anything But Prideful: Free Speech And Conversion Therapy Bans, State-Federal Action Plans, And Rooting Out Medical Fraud, Jordan Hutt

Fordham Law Review

At a time when conversion therapy might seem archaic to many people, this practice remains prevalent across the United States and finds legal support in the halls of federal courthouses. In 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, in Otto v. City of Boca Raton, held that two ordinances banning conversion therapy in Boca Raton and Palm Beach violated First Amendment free speech rights. Specifically, Otto held that conversion therapy bans were content-based restrictions subject to strict scrutiny. Conversely, the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the Third and Ninth Circuits’ prior decisions upheld conversion therapy bans …

Ripple Effect: The Sec's Major Questions Doctrine Problem, Matt Donovan

Fordham Law Review

Crypto assets and blockchain technology have the potential to create unprecedented equitable access to financial institutions. Despite this potential, there is a robust debate regarding federal agencies’ jurisdiction over the novel asset class. Without clear statutory guidelines, federal agencies have been forced to resolve this debate through the rulemaking process. However, agency rules regarding jurisdiction over crypto assets could be scrutinized by a reviewing court under the major questions doctrine. Once highly deferential to agency rules, the U.S. Supreme Court in recent terms has repeatedly struck down agency rules when an agency claims an unheralded power to regulate an issue …

Beyond Removal, Jane Manners

Fordham Law Review

The contemporary debate over presidential power often assumes that removal is the primary tool through which a President exercises control over executive branch officers to fulfill the Constitutional duty to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” This must be so, the logic goes, because without this authority, “the President could not be held fully accountable for discharging his own responsibilities.” The power to remove, the U.S. Supreme Court has reasoned, also endows the President with the power to supervise. To be sure, other scholars and jurists have pointed out the ways that this fails to capture the range …

Representing Noncitizens In The Context Of Legal Instability And Adverse Detention Precedent, Nancy Morawetz

Fordham Law Review

This Essay addresses three structural aspects of immigration law that have shifted in recent years and present important challenges for delivering adequate representation. Although the Katzmann study group’s many initiatives have shored up access to counsel in immigration courts and for immigration applications, the ground has been shifting under our feet. This Essay discusses three (of many) phenomena that make it harder than ever to lawyer on behalf of noncitizens. The first is the rise of red-state lawsuits that lead to enormous unpredictability about the agency rules under which lawyers can expect to operate. The second is the individuation and …

The [De]Value Of Unsubstantiated Allegations Against The Police, Francy R. Monestime

Fordham Law Review

In 2020, New York State repealed Civil Rights Law section 50-a, which formerly prohibited disclosure of police and other civil servant disciplinary records. Shortly after this repeal, New York City’s Civilian Complaint Review Board (CCRB) released thousands of records of civilian complaints for all current and former New York City police officers that dated back to 2000. The release included substantiated findings of wrongdoing and unsubstantiated records in which no wrongdoing was found. Records continue to be released in this manner following the CCRB’s investigations.

Under New York City’s Administrative Procedure Act, agencies like the CCRB must follow certain procedures …

Slowing Down Accelerated Approval: Examining The Role Of Industry Influence, Patient Advocacy Organizations, And Political Pressure On Fda Drug Approval, Stephanie Diu

Fordham Law Review

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has been revered as the gold standard in pharmaceutical safety and efficacy review since the 1960s. More recently, partly in response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic and the pressing need for new treatments, the FDA established an accelerated approval process to hasten the review of new drug applications so that drugs could be approved and brought to market as soon as possible. Although accelerated approval has led to the availability of new treatments for patients with few other options, this Note argues that, today, the FDA grants accelerated approval too hastily and may be …

A Unitary Theory Of Strict Deference, Zach Huffman

Fordham Law Review

Agencies can interpret ambiguous statutes and regulations due to their expertise in executing complex regulatory schemes and the presumption that, for certain issues, Congress prefers agencies, not courts, to retain such power. This proposition is commonly referred to as agency deference. A recent U.S. Supreme Court case, Kisor v. Wilkie, challenged a core principle of agency deference called Auer deference, which allows agencies to interpret ambiguous regulations so long as the agency’s interpretation of the regulation is not plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation as a whole. While the justices vigorously debated whether Auer v. Robbins should have …

Auer 2.0: The Disuniform Application Of Auer Deference After Kisor V. Wilkie, Daniel Lutfy

Fordham Law Review

This Note examines how lower courts have applied Auer deference after the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Kisor v. Wilkie. The Court granted certiorari in Kisor to answer one question: whether to overturn the deference regimes created by Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co. and Auer v. Robbins. The Court upheld the doctrines and clarified their reach, limits, and proper application. This Note focuses on Kisor’s holding regarding the extent judges must scrutinize a regulation before concluding it is ambiguous. Despite the Court’s attempt to explicate a standard, lower courts have demonstrated stark differences in regulatory …

Differentiating Legislative From Nonlegislative Rules: An Empirical And Qualitative Analysis, Nadav D. Ben Zur

Fordham Law Review

The elusive distinction between legislative rules and nonlegislative rules has frustrated courts, motivated voluminous scholarly debate, and ushered in a flood of litigation against administrative agencies. In the absence of U.S. Supreme Court guidance on the proper demarcating line, circuit courts have adopted various tests to ascertain a rule’s proper classification. This Note analyzes all 241 cases in which a circuit court has used one or more of the enunciated tests to differentiate legislative from nonlegislative rules. These opinions come from every one of the thirteen circuits and span the period of the early 1950s through 2018. This Note identifies …

Institutional Independence: Lawyers And The Administrative State, Melissa Mortazavi

Fordham Law Review

The institutional structure where federal government lawyers practice is fraught with political and economic pressures that undermine the ability of lawyers to exercise independent professional judgment. A lack of candid legal advice in this space not only removes a pivotal fail-safe between legal and illegal state action but also precariously imbalances the powerful administrative state, exposing it to undue political influence. For these reasons, this Article argues that structural changes to administrative institutions must be made to support and nurture lawyers’ ability to independently determine the bounds of legality. Previous scholarship has examined the role of professional independence for lawyers …

Auer Deference: Doubling Down On Delegation's Defects, Ronald A. Cass

Fordham Law Review

Together with the better-known Chevron deference rule, the doctrine articulated in Auer v. Robbins two decades ago—which makes reasonable administrative constructions of ambiguous administrative rules binding on courts in most circumstances—has become a focal point for concerns about the expanding administrative state. Auer deference, even more than Chevron deference, enlarges administrative authority in ways that are at odds with basic constitutional structures and due process requirements. Objections to Auer have provided cogent reasons for why courts should not grant deference to administrative interpretations merely because an agency’s rule is unclear. The most commonly voiced objections, however, do not explain why …

Home Rules: The Case For Local Administrative Procedure, Casey Adams

Fordham Law Review

Administrative law is critical to the modern practice of governance. Administrative rules fill the gaps in statutes left open by lawmakers, allow agencies to exercise legislative grants of authority and discretion, and give agencies with subject-matter expertise and frontline experience the opportunity to promulgate detailed standards and requirements in their designated issue areas. Adjudication allows an agency to dispose of matters and disputes formally before it, whether under its rules or another source of law. While agencies at every level of government—federal, state, and local— engage in administrative action, legal scholarship on administrative law is almost exclusively focused on the …

“You Must Construct Additional Pylons”: Building A Better Framework For Esports Governance, Laura L. Chao

Fordham Law Review

The popularity of “esports,” also known as “electronic sports” or competitive video gaming, has exploded in recent years and captured the attention of cord-cutting millennials—often to the detriment of sports such as basketball, football, baseball, and hockey. In the United States, the commercial dominance of such traditional sports stems from decades of regulatory support. Consequently, while esports regulation is likely to emulate many aspects of traditional sports governance, the esports industry is fraught with challenges that inhibit sophisticated ownership and capital investment. Domestic regulation is complicated by underlying intellectual property ownership and ancillary considerations such as fluctuations in a video …

“I Am Undocumented And A New Yorker”: Affirmative City Citizenship And New York City’S Idnyc Program, Amy C. Torres

Fordham Law Review

The power to confer legal citizenship status is possessed solely by the federal government. Yet the courts and legal theorists have demonstrated that citizenship encompasses factors beyond legal status, including rights, inclusion, and political participation. As a result, even legal citizens can face barriers to citizenship, broadly understood, due to factors including their race, class, gender, or disability. Given this multidimensionality, the city, as the place where residents carry out the tasks of their daily lives, is a critical space for promoting elements of citizenship. This Note argues that recent city municipal identification-card programs have created a new form of …

The Total Takings Myth, Lynn E. Blais

Fordham Law Review

For almost thirty-five years, the U.S. Supreme Court has attempted to carve out a total takings doctrine within its regulatory takings jurisprudence. Most regulatory takings claims are evaluated under the “ad hoc” threefactor test first articulated in Penn Central Transportation Co. v. City of New York. Exceedingly few of these claims are successful. But the Court has identified certain categories of government actions that are compensable takings per se, otherwise known as total takings. This began in 1982 with Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp., where the Court held that a land use ordinance requiring a landowner to …

Paying Too Dearly For A Whistle: Properly Protecting Internal Whistleblowers, Leonardo Labriola

Fordham Law Review

In light of substantial disagreement among the circuits on which types of whistleblowers Dodd-Frank intends to protect, and newly proposed legislation which suggests a solution, this Note inspects Dodd-Frank’s whistleblower protections in an effort to better explain which types of Business Organizations whistleblowers should and should not be protected. This Note briefly outlines the United States’s repeated history of increased regulation following financial crises, culminating in the Sarbanes-Oxley and Dodd-Frank Acts. It then describes the goals that motivated these acts and how whistleblowers play an outsized role in accomplishing those goals. It also examines the critical statute for Business Organizations …

Cfius In The Age Of Chinese Investment, Patrick Griffin

Fordham Law Review

As China’s economy has developed, its companies, both state-owned and privately held, have moved to expand their operations in the United States to the point where many now seek to invest in—and on occasion, acquire—U.S. counterparts. This trend has set off alarm bells over fears that China’s unique political and economic system, which gives the state extensive influence over all corporations regardless of their ownership structure, renders such transactions national security threats. Recent hostility toward Chinese-led inbound investment is not a new trend; Congress has attempted to assert itself into the screening process undertaken by the Committee on Foreign Investment …

Who Put The Quo In Quid Pro Quo?: Why Courts Should Apply Mcdonnell ’S “Official Act” Definition Narrowly, Adam F. Minchew

Fordham Law Review

Federal prosecutors have several tools at their disposal to bring criminal charges against state and local officials for their engagement in corrupt activity. Section 666 federal funds bribery and § 1951 Hobbs Act extortion, two such statuary tools, have coexisted for the past thirty-six years, during which time § 666 has seen an increasing share of total prosecutions while the Hobbs Act’s share of prosecutions has fallen commensurately. In the summer of 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided McDonnell v. United States—a decision that threatens to quicken the demise of Hobbs Act extortion in favor of § 666. If …

Fair Or Foul?: Sec Administrative Proceedings And Prospects For Reform Through Removal Legislation, Joseph A. Grundfest

Fordham Law Review

This Article catalogues the long list of criticisms of the Commission’s administrative proceedings. It also evaluates data describing the outcome of litigated matters and finds that, with the exception of insider trading cases, the Commission has an exceptionally high and statistically indistinguishable record of success in administrative and federal court proceedings alike. The data thus seem not to support the view that the Commission has a generalized home-court advantage in administrative proceedings. Nonetheless, the Commission’s virtually unfettered discretion in forum selection decisions, when it can assign cases to a forum that it controls, raises a plethora of institutional design concerns.

Now Is The Time!: Challenging Resegregation And Displacement In The Age Of Hypergentrification, Bethany Y. Li

Fordham Law Review

Gentrification is reaching a tipping point of resegregating urban space in global cities like New York and San Francisco, often spurred by seemingly neutral government policies. The displacement resulting from gentrification forces low-income people from their homes into areas of concentrated poverty. Low-income communities consequently lose space, place, social capital, and cultural wealth that residents and small businesses have spent decades building up. This Article argues that communities at this tipping point must integrate litigation strategies directly aimed at stemming the adverse impacts of gentrification. Community organizing is integral to antidisplacement efforts, but litigation—and its injunctive powers—should play a larger …