Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Administrative State (1)
- Administrative agency (1)
- Administrative law (1)
- Alexander Hamilton (1)
- COVD-19 (1)
-
- Chevron (1)
- Clean Air Act (1)
- Constitutional Law (1)
- Constitutional law (1)
- Cost-benefit State (1)
- Deference (1)
- Delegation (1)
- Emergency Use Authorization (1)
- Environmental regulation (1)
- Executive Power (1)
- Expedited Removal Proceedings (1)
- FDA (1)
- Federal courts (1)
- Federal government (1)
- First Congress (1)
- Founding era (1)
- Gundy (1)
- History (1)
- Issue Exhaustion (1)
- James Madison (1)
- Judicial review (1)
- Justice Gorsuch (1)
- Legislative Powers (1)
- Nondelegation (1)
- Originalism (1)
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Lost History Of Delegation At The Founding, Christine Chabot
The Lost History Of Delegation At The Founding, Christine Chabot
Georgia Law Review
The new Supreme Court is poised to bring the administrative state to a grinding halt. Five Justices have endorsed Justice Gorsuch’s dissent in Gundy v. United States—an opinion that threatens to invalidate countless regulatory statutes in which Congress has delegated significant policymaking authority to the Executive Branch. Justice Gorsuch claimed that the “text and history” of the Constitution required the Court to replace a longstanding constitutional doctrine that permits broad delegations with a more restrictive one. But the supposedly originalist arguments advanced by Justice Gorsuch and like-minded scholars run counter to the understandings of delegation that prevailed in the Founding …
Agents Of Bioshield: The Fda, Emergency Use Authorizations, And Public Trust, Kirstiana Perryman
Agents Of Bioshield: The Fda, Emergency Use Authorizations, And Public Trust, Kirstiana Perryman
Georgia Law Review
The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic spurred the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) to utilize the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) procedure more than ever before. The pandemic pushed the relatively obscure procedure into public consciousness, making it a frequent topic of discussion and debate. The EUA procedure permits the FDA Commissioner to authorize the introduction of drugs, devices, or biological products into interstate commerce for use in an actual or potential emergency. To issue an authorization, the FDA Commissioner must determine that it is “reasonable to believe,” based on the “totality of the evidence,” that the product “may be effective.” This standard …
How Chevron Deference Fits Into Article Iii, Kent H. Barnett
How Chevron Deference Fits Into Article Iii, Kent H. Barnett
Scholarly Works
U.S. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, along with Professor Philip Hamburger, assert that Chevron deference-under which courts defer to reasonable agency statutory interpretations-violates Article III. Chevron does so because, they argue, it either permits agencies, not courts, "to say what the law is" or requires judges to forgo independent judgment by favoring the government's position. If they are correct, Congress could not require courts to accept reasonable agency statutory interpretations under any circumstances. This Article does what these critics, perhaps surprisingly, do not do-situates challenges to Chevron within the broad landscape of the Court's current Article III …
The Clean Air Act Of 1963: Postwar Environmental Politics And The Debate Over Federal Power, Adam D. Orford
The Clean Air Act Of 1963: Postwar Environmental Politics And The Debate Over Federal Power, Adam D. Orford
Scholarly Works
This Article explores the development of the Clean Air Act of 1963, the first law to allow the federal government to fight air pollution rather than study it. The Article focuses on the postwar years (1945-1963) and explores the rise of public health medical research, cooperative federalism, and the desire to harness the powers of the federal government for domestic social improvement, as key precursors to environmental law. It examines the origins of the idea that the federal government should "do something" about air pollution, and how that idea was translated, through drafting, lobbying, politicking, hearings, debate, influence, and votes, …
Judicial Review In Expedited Removal Proceedings: Applying Sims V. Apfel To Assess The Role Of Issue Exhaustion, Emily C. Snow
Judicial Review In Expedited Removal Proceedings: Applying Sims V. Apfel To Assess The Role Of Issue Exhaustion, Emily C. Snow
Georgia Law Review
For noncitizens in expedited removal proceedings, obtaining
judicial review of removal orders is an uphill battle. Some
barriers to judicial review are statutory: noncitizens must first
exhaust their administrative remedies, and they may seek
review only in a federal circuit court of appeals. Other barriers
are judicial—i.e., imposed by courts, not statutes.
A circuit split has emerged over one of these judicially
imposed barriers to judicial review. Some courts have held that
expedited removal proceedings do not accommodate legal
challenges to removal. In those circuits, noncitizens preserve the
opportunity for judicial review even when they do not raise a
legal …
The Expressiveness Of Regulatory Trade-Offs, Benjamin M. Chen
The Expressiveness Of Regulatory Trade-Offs, Benjamin M. Chen
Georgia Law Review
Trade-offs between a sacred value—like human life—
against a secular one—like money—are considered taboo.
People are supposed to be offended by such trade-offs and to
punish those who contemplate them. Yet the last decades in the
United States have witnessed the rise of the cost-benefit state.
Most major rules promulgated today undergo a regulatory
impact analysis, and agencies monetize risks as grave as those
to human life and values as abstract as human dignity.
Prominent academics and lawmakers advocate the weighing of
costs and benefits as an element of rational regulation. The
cost-benefit revolution is a technocratic coup, however, if …