Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Law
Major Questions About The "Major Questions" Doctrine, Kevin O. Leske
Major Questions About The "Major Questions" Doctrine, Kevin O. Leske
Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law
After over a decade of hibernation, the United States Supreme Court has awoken the “major questions” doctrine, which has re-emerged in an expanded form. Under the doctrine, a court will not defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statutory provision in circumstances where the case involves an issue of deep economic or political significance or where the interpretive question could effectuate an enormous and transformative expansion of the agency’s regulatory authority. While the doctrine’s re-emergence in recent Supreme Court cases has already raised concerns, a subtle shift in its application has gone unnoticed. Unlike in earlier cases, where the Court …
An Insurmountable Obstacle: Denying Deference To The Bia’S Social Visibility Requirement, Kathleen Kersh
An Insurmountable Obstacle: Denying Deference To The Bia’S Social Visibility Requirement, Kathleen Kersh
Michigan Journal of Race and Law
In the last fifteen years, the Board of Immigration Appeals has imposed a requirement that persons seeking asylum based on membership in a particular social group must establish that the social group is “socially visible” throughout society. This Comment argues that the social visibility requirement should be denied administrative deference on several grounds. The requirement should be denied Chevron deference because Congress’s intent behind the Refugee Act of 1980 is clear and unambiguous and, alternatively, the requirement is an impermissible interpretation of the statute. The requirement is also arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedures Act. This Comment argues that …
Deference And Disability Discrimination, Rebecca Hanner White
Deference And Disability Discrimination, Rebecca Hanner White
Michigan Law Review
For thirty-five years, the civil rights community has paid scant attention to administrative law principles. Those interested in advancing on-the-job equality for this country's working men and women (or in preserving employer autonomy vis-a-vis federal encroachment) have all but ignored what many consider the arcane technicalities of administrative law. This state of affairs is strange when one considers that administration and enforcement of each of our major federal laws outlawing employment discrimination have been confided to an administrative agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission ("EEOC"). The EEOC, however, has historically been given short shrift by litigants and by the judiciary. …
The Exclusion Of Hiv-Positive Immigrants Under The Nicaraguan Adjustment And Central American Relief Act And The Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act, Statutory Interpretation, Communicable Disease, Public Health, Legislative Intent, Shayna S. Cook
Michigan Law Review
The United States has turned away immigrants infected with the human immunodeficiency virus ("HIV") under the public health exclusion of the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") since the mid-1980's. Since Congress codified the HIV exclusion in 1993, any alien applying for an immigrant or nonimmigrant visa, adjustment of status to lawful permanent resident, or refugee status must first have a blood test for HIV. The HIV exclusion is not absolute, however. Each HIV-positive alien can apply for one of two waivers of the HIV exclusion that are available in the INA. When an alien applies for immigrant or permanent resident …