Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
President/Executive Department Commons™
Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
- Keyword
-
- Absolute immunity (1)
- Absolute judicial immunity (1)
- Administrative law (1)
- Agencies (1)
- Auer (1)
-
- Behrens (1)
- Behrens v. Pelletier (1)
- Buckley (1)
- Buckley v. Fitzsimmons (1)
- Burns (1)
- Burns v. Reed (1)
- Cap-and-trade (1)
- Chemerinsky (1)
- Chevron (1)
- Civil rights litigation (1)
- Congressional authority (1)
- DACA (1)
- DAPA (1)
- Deference (1)
- Elected officials (1)
- Entitlement to absolute immunity (1)
- Erwin Chemerinsky (1)
- Executive authority (1)
- Executive orders (1)
- Fitzsimmons (1)
- Forsyth (1)
- Gender identity (1)
- Government officers (1)
- Government officials (1)
- Governmental employee (1)
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in President/Executive Department
Absolute Immunity: General Principles And Recent Developments, Erwin Chemerinsky
Absolute Immunity: General Principles And Recent Developments, Erwin Chemerinsky
Erwin Chemerinsky
No abstract provided.
The President’S Pen And The Bureaucrat’S Fiefdom, John C. Eastman
The President’S Pen And The Bureaucrat’S Fiefdom, John C. Eastman
John C. Eastman
Perhaps spurred by aggressive use of executive orders and “lawmaking” by administrative agencies by the last couple of presidential administrations, several Justices on the Supreme Court have recently expressed concern that the Court’s deference doctrines have undermined core separation of powers constitutional principles. This article explores those Justice’s invitation to revisit those deference doctrines and some of the executive actions that have prompted the concern.
Executive Agreements Relying On Implied Statutory Authority: A Response To Bodansky And Spiro, David A. Wirth
Executive Agreements Relying On Implied Statutory Authority: A Response To Bodansky And Spiro, David A. Wirth
David A. Wirth
No abstract provided.
Executive Action And Nonaction, Tom Campbell
Executive Action And Nonaction, Tom Campbell
Tom Campbell
Action by the executive can be challenged by a party with standing, and there is usually no shortage of such parties. The executive’s failure to act, however, is much more difficult to submit to judicial scrutiny. I propose that standards for reviewing such nonaction are available under precedent of the Administrative Procedure Act, and under severability analysis. That is, a reviewing court can determine whether the executive’s failure to enforce part of a law leaves the rest of the law to operate meaningfully as Congress intended (akin to severability analysis), and APA precedent can guide courts to determine whether nonaction …