Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Bhanot v. Chertoff (1)
- Calle (1)
- Cao He Lin v. US Department of Justice (1)
- Chen v. INS (1)
- Chenery (1)
-
- Chevron (1)
- Dale v. Holder (1)
- Dhine v. Slattery (1)
- Dobrota (1)
- EOIR (1)
- EPA (1)
- Executive Office for Immigration Review (1)
- Fergiste (1)
- Futility of Remand (1)
- Ghebremedhin v. Ashcroft (1)
- Gonzalez v. Thomas (1)
- Halim (1)
- Hibert v. INS (1)
- Hoxhallari v. Gonzales (1)
- Hussain v. Gonzales (1)
- INS v. Ventura (1)
- Karimijanaki (1)
- Kyong Ho Shin (1)
- Li Hua Lin (1)
- Li Zu Guan (1)
- Matadin v. Mukasey (1)
- National Association of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife (1)
- Navas v. INS (1)
- Negusie v. Holder (1)
- Qyteza v. Gonzales (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
When It Reins It Pours, Noah M. Sachs
When It Reins It Pours, Noah M. Sachs
Law Faculty Publications
Imagine if the board of a Fortune 500 company required the company’s vice presidents to obtain board approval before implementing any decision. Now imagine that the board is highly polarized and its members are at each other’s throats. A recipe for corporate gridlock, right?
Amazingly, House Speaker John Boehner, Senator Jim DeMint, and other prominent Republicans are embracing this dubious chain-of-command for the federal government. They are promoting a bill called the REINS Act (Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny), which would stop any major regulation issued by any federal agency from taking effect until it receives approval …
“To Remand, Or Not To Remand”: Ventura’S Ordinary Remand Rule And The Evolving Jurisprudence Of Futility, Patrick J. Glen
“To Remand, Or Not To Remand”: Ventura’S Ordinary Remand Rule And The Evolving Jurisprudence Of Futility, Patrick J. Glen
Richmond Journal of Global Law & Business
Presumably few federal appellate judges are confronted with the Danish prince’s existential angst: “To be, or not to be: that is the question. . . .” Nonetheless, a similar ambivalence may be present in the circumstance of judicial review of administrative agency decisions. No less eminent an authority than former Second Circuit Judge Henry Friendly expressed just such angst in the introduction to his 1969 Duke Law Journal article, in which he attempted to discern bright-line rules in the Supreme Court’s 1943 SEC v. Chenery decision: “Although when I began my labors, I had the hope of discovering a bright …