Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Chevron; Chevron (1)
- Civil Rights Act; Title VII; Discrimination Law; workplace discrimination; Adverse Employment Action; Hostile Work Environment; Brown v. Brody; Chambers v. District of Columbia; Circuit Split; harm; de minimis harm; Muldrow v. City of St. Louis Missouri (1)
- First Amendment; Establishment Clause; Religion; Kennedy (1)
- Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council (1)
- Inc.; Loper Bright; Loper Bright Enterprise v. Raimondo; admin; administrative law; Administrative State; deference; judicial deference; agency; agency expertise; Marbury v. Madison; Magnuson-Stevens Act; Brand X; Nat’l Cable and Telecomm. Ass’n v. Brand X Internet Serv.; Burden Shifting; West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency (1)
-
- Injunctions; nonacquiescence; administrative law; nationwide injunctions; erroneous decisions; forum shopping; judicial review; judicial abuse; Make the Road New York v. McAleenan (1)
- Kennedy v. Bremerton School District; School Board; Legislative Prayer; Legislative Prayer Exception; Lemon; Lemon v. Kurtzman; Lemon Test; Endorsement Test; Coercion Test; Prayer; Prayer in School; McCarty; Chino Valley (1)
- Supreme Court of the United States; SCOTUS; major questions doctrine; MQD; administrative law; crypto; cryptocurrency; blockchain; crypto asset; SEC v. W.J. Howey Co.; Howey test; securities; West Virginia v. EPA; Roberts Court; judicial enforcement actions (1)
- U.S.A. (1)
Articles 1 - 5 of 5
Full-Text Articles in Jurisprudence
Agency Deference After Loper: Expertise As A Casualty Of A War Against The “Administrative State”, Michael M. Epstein
Agency Deference After Loper: Expertise As A Casualty Of A War Against The “Administrative State”, Michael M. Epstein
Brooklyn Law Review
Chevron deference has been a foundational principle for administrative law for decades. Chevron provided a two-step analysis for determining whether an agency would be given deference in its decision-making. This deferential test finds its legitimacy on the grounds of agency expertise and accountability. However, when the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Loper Bright Enterprise v. Raimondo, it positioned itself to potentially overrule or severely limit Chevron. An overruling of Chevron would place judicial deference to administrative agency decisions in peril by allowing courts to substitute their own views over the informed opinions of agency experts. This …
Nationwide Injunctions And The Administrative State, Russell L. Weaver
Nationwide Injunctions And The Administrative State, Russell L. Weaver
Brooklyn Law Review
Where an administrative regulation is deemed by a court to be illegal, unconstitutional, or otherwise invalid, courts sometimes issue nationwide injunctions. In other words, instead of holding that the regulation cannot be applied to the individuals before the court, the court prohibits the agency from applying the regulation anywhere in the country, including to others not before the court. This article explores the debate surrounding the appropriateness of nationwide injunctions. While at first glance such injunctions may seem to make sense, they can have serious consequences, including risk of abuse and forum shopping, amplification of erroneous decisions, and the negative …
When Life Takes Your Lemons: Resolving The Legislative Prayer Debate In School Board Settings In Light Of Kennedy V. Bremerton School District, Jordan Halper
Brooklyn Law Review
The COVID-19 pandemic fanned the flames of a fire that had been slowly but steadily burning since 2016, arming the loudest warriors of America’s endless culture war with a slew of new divisive issues. Virtually overnight, parental rights groups began capitalizing on the frustration in their communities in order to spur political change, training their ire toward public schools. What began as a crusade against mask mandates and vaccines manifested into a well-funded effort by ultraconservative groups to undermine the public education system as a whole. Against this backdrop, the legislative prayer exception—which was meant to sanction the practice of …
The Major Questions Doctrine’S Domain, Todd Phillips, Beau J. Baumann
The Major Questions Doctrine’S Domain, Todd Phillips, Beau J. Baumann
Brooklyn Law Review
In West Virginia v. EPA, the Supreme Court elevated the major questions doctrine to new heights by reframing it as a substantive canon and clear statement rule rooted in the separation of powers. The academic response has missed two unanswered questions that will determine the extent of the doctrine’s domain. First, how will the Court apply the doctrine to a range of different regulatory schemes? The doctrine has so far only been applied to nationwide legislative rules that are both (1) economically or politically significant and (2) transformative. It is unclear whether the doctrine applies to alternative modes of regulation …
Dogma, Discrimination, And Doctrinal Disarray: A New Test To Define Harm Under Title Vii, Zach Islam
Dogma, Discrimination, And Doctrinal Disarray: A New Test To Define Harm Under Title Vii, Zach Islam
Brooklyn Law Review
Historically, federal courts have used the “adverse employment action” test in Title VII disparate treatment, disparate impact, and retaliation cases to determine whether a plaintiff has suffered adequate harm. This note argues that this approach is fundamentally flawed. At the outset, the test is a judicial power grab with no support in the statutory language. What is more, it fails to uphold the plain policy purposes for Title VII by largely ignoring evidence of discriminatory acts in the workplace that Congress sought to prevent in passing the statute. Consequently, Title VII plaintiffs get the short end of the stick with …