Law Commons^™

A Major Question For Administrative Law: How Are Courts Applying The Major Questions Doctrine Post West Virginia V. Epa?, Christopher Eckhardt

Catholic University Law Review

On June 30, 2022, judicial deference toward actions of administrative agencies took a significant hit. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court formally recognized—for the first time—the major questions doctrine, which requires agencies to identify clear congressional authorization when claiming the authority to make decisions of vast economic and political significance. Since June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court has utilized the major questions doctrine in decisions of national importance, including topics ranging from environmental protection efforts to cancelling student debt. This note offers a snapshot of how the major questions doctrine has been applied by federal courts across the country …

Judicial Power And Potential Unconstitutionality: A Scholastic Perspective, Kevin C. Walsh

Catholic University Law Review

This essay is an exercise in constructive retrieval of the traditional American understanding of judicial power with respect to judicial disregard of potentially unconstitutional laws when identifying rules of decision in constitutional adjudication.

This retrieval makes use of the act/potency distinction from Scholastic philosophy, Thomas Aquinas’s distinction between ius and lex, and John Marshall’s canonical account of the judicial application of the Constitution as a rule of decision in Marbury v. Madison to diagnose the cause of contemporary severability doctrine’s problems and to identify a basic framework for replacement doctrine.

I contend that the doctrinal pieces for the replacement …

When Is Police Interrogation Really Police Interrogation? A Look At The Application Of The Miranda Mandate, Paul Marcus

Catholic University Law Review

Decades after the Supreme Court’s decision in Miranda v. Arizona, questions abound as to what constitutes interrogation when a suspect is in custody. What appeared a concise, uniform rule has, in practice, left the Fifth Amendment waters muddied. This article addresses a potential disconnect between law enforcement and the courts by analyzing examples of issues arising from Miranda’s application in an array of case law. Ultimately, it attempts to clarify an ambiguity by offering a standard for what conduct classifies as an interrogation.

The Roberts Court And Penumbral Federalism, Edward Cantu

Catholic University Law Review

For several decades the Court has invoked “state dignity” to animate federalism reasoning in isolated doctrinal contexts. Recent Roberts Court decisions suggest that a focus on state dignity, prestige, status, and similar ethereal concepts—which derive from a “penumbral” reading of the Tenth Amendment—represent the budding of a different doctrinal approach to federalism generally. This article terms this new approach “penumbral federalism,” an approach less concerned with delineating state from federal regulatory turf, and more concerned with maintaining the states as viable competitors for the respect and loyalty of the citizenry.

After fleshing out what “penumbral federalism” is and its …