Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Civil Law (9)
- Administrative Law (5)
- Constitutional Law (5)
- Courts (5)
- Supreme Court of the United States (5)
-
- Agency (4)
- Litigation (4)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (2)
- Property Law and Real Estate (2)
- Securities Law (2)
- Antitrust and Trade Regulation (1)
- First Amendment (1)
- Housing Law (1)
- Labor and Employment Law (1)
- Land Use Law (1)
- Law and Politics (1)
- Law and Society (1)
- Legal History (1)
- Legal Remedies (1)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (1)
- Religion Law (1)
- State and Local Government Law (1)
- Torts (1)
- Keyword
-
- Chevron; Chevron (2)
- Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council (2)
- U.S.A. (2)
- 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)
- Emoji; emoticon; Unicode Standard; securities law; corporate law; Rule 10b-5; Securities Exchange Act; Securities and Exchange Commission; SEC; Reddit; wallstreetbets; retail investors; Ryan Cohen; Bed Bath and Beyond; securities fraud; meme; meme stock; gamestop; In re Bed Bath & Beyond Corp.; pump and dump scheme; twitter; Valence Aware Dictionary and Sentiment Reasoner; VADER (1)
-
- First Amendment; Establishment Clause; Religion; Kennedy (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)
- Inc.; Loper Bright; Loper Bright Enterprise v. Raimondo; admin; administrative law; Administrative State; deference; judicial deference; agency; agency expertise; Marbury v. Madison; West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency; Skidmore v. Swift & Co.; Major Questions Doctrine; MQD (1)
- Injunctions; nonacquiescence; administrative law; nationwide injunctions; erroneous decisions; forum shopping; judicial review; judicial abuse; Make the Road New York v. McAleenan (1)
- Judicial deference; landmark; historic district; preservation; Landmarks Preservation Commission; LPC; New York City; Grand Central Terminal; New York Landmarks Law; Penn Central Transportation Company v. The City of New York; Real Estate Board of New York; REBNY; historic preservation; zoning; Article 78; hard look approach; arbitrary and capricious standard; certificate of appropriateness; gentrification; housing shortage; housing crisis; regulatory capture; urban development; landmark demolition (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)
- Land use; New York eminent domain; New York takings; Uniform Land Use Review Procedure; ULURP; Penn Station; Goldstein v. N.Y. State Urban Development Corp; Kelo v. City of New London; community board; redevelopment; city planning; eminent domain; Eminent Domain Procedure Law; EDPL; community review; General Project Plan; public purpose; City Council; judicial review (1)
- Preamble; Constitution; We the People; originalism; constitutional interpretation; Jacobson v. Massachusetts; constitutional history; legal history; Founding; original meaning; originalist; history; Edward Coke; William Blackstone (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)
Articles 1 - 10 of 10
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 …
Full Moon Or Full Fraud? A Proposed Method For Interpreting Emojis Under Rule 10b-5, Sophie Abrams
Full Moon Or Full Fraud? A Proposed Method For Interpreting Emojis Under Rule 10b-5, Sophie Abrams
Brooklyn Law Review
In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, many Americans who were stuck at home turned to social media forums in search of community and investing advice. Fifteen million (and counting) of them found community in r/wallstreetbets, a group on Reddit that banded together to drive up the prices of “meme stocks.” Bed Bath and Beyond was one stock that piqued retail investors’ interest after seeing billionaire investor Ryan Cohen take a 10 percent stake and activist role in the company. However, Cohen ended up being a large disappointment to his retail investor fans, as he subsequently sold off his stake …
Balancing Chevron, Skidmore, And Major Questions: A Novel Framework For Judicial Deference To Agency Legal Interpretations, Charles A. Bower
Balancing Chevron, Skidmore, And Major Questions: A Novel Framework For Judicial Deference To Agency Legal Interpretations, Charles A. Bower
Brooklyn Law Review
The Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. EPA is a watershed moment for administrative law. For the first time, the Court explicitly invoked the Major Questions Doctrine by name in a majority opinion. The usage of the Major Questions Doctrine is important on its own, but equally important is the fact that the longstanding Chevron doctrine played no part in the majority’s analysis. The absence of Chevron doctrine in West Virginia in favor of the Major Questions Doctrine continues a trend where the Court has been relying on Chevron less often. The threats the Chevron faces do not appear …
Democratizing New York’S Eminent Domain Regime, Gregory Wagner
Democratizing New York’S Eminent Domain Regime, Gregory Wagner
Brooklyn Law Review
Since the Supreme Court’s landmark eminent domain decision in Kelo v. City of New London, forty-three states have amended their eminent domain laws to constrain their own eminent domain powers. New York, however, was not one of them. In Goldstein v. N.Y. State Urban Development Corp., New York’s highest court decided firmly in favor of the state’s broad eminent domain powers, yet counseled New York lawmakers to act to legislatively limit the state’s unbridled eminent domain authority. Again, New York did not do so—allowing an eminent domain regime that leads to systemic deprivation of public participation to remain fully in …
Preambles Before The Preamble: Rediscovering The Preamble’S Role In Constitutional Interpretation, Stuart Ford
Preambles Before The Preamble: Rediscovering The Preamble’S Role In Constitutional Interpretation, Stuart Ford
Brooklyn Law Review
This article explores how the Preamble to the Constitution (Preamble) would have been viewed when it was drafted by looking at how preambles were used in America in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. It offers the first comprehensive look at how preambles were viewed by lawyers, judges, politicians, and the public in the years before the Constitution was ratified. It demonstrates that courts’ modern treatment of the Preamble is at odds with its original meaning. Eighteenth-century Americans viewed the Preamble as an important tool for understanding and interpreting the Constitution. They would have expected courts to interpret the Constitution’s terms …
Balancing Preservation With Growth: How Less Judicial Deference To Decisions Made By The Landmarks Preservation Commission Can Save New York City, Amy Cushman
Brooklyn Law Review
The New York City Landmarks Law of 1965, envisioning the preservation of historical treasures, empowered the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) with the authority to designate and regulate landmarks and historic districts. Originally established in response to public outcry over the loss of iconic architectural structures, the LPC aimed to safeguard the city's cultural, social, and architectural legacy. However, this note contends that recent LPC decisions, particularly the issuance of Certificates of Appropriateness for luxury residential construction involving partial demolition of landmarks, betray the original preservation goals. Delving into the legal recourse available under the New York Civil …