Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Publication
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
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 …
Chevron In The Circuit Courts: The Codebook Appendix, Kent H. Barnett, Christopher J. Walker
Chevron In The Circuit Courts: The Codebook Appendix, Kent H. Barnett, Christopher J. Walker
Scholarly Works
For our empirical study on the use of Chevron deference in the federal courts of appeals, we utilized the following Codebook. This Codebook draws substantially from the codebook appended to William Eskridge and Lauren Baer's pathbreaking study of administrative law's deference doctrines at the Supreme Court. Our research assistants and we followed the instructions below when coding judicial decisions. To address questions as they arose and to ensure consistent coding, we maintained close contact with each other and our research assistants throughout the project and clarified the Codebook to address additional issues. Further details concerning our methodology (and its limitations) …
Imports Or Made-In-China: Comparison Of Two Constitutional Cases In China And The United States, Xiao Li
Imports Or Made-In-China: Comparison Of Two Constitutional Cases In China And The United States, Xiao Li
LLM Theses and Essays
When its economic increase attracts the global attention, China is also looking for a break-through in its judicial reform. The Qi v. Chen case (2001) was considered to be the Chinese version of Marbury v. Madison and gave rise to a heated discussion of the judicial review power in China. This article will analyze the doubts on the Qi case and the prospects of judicial review it indicates through comparison with Marbury v. Madison. Although Qi v. Chen opened the door for constitutional litigation, its dramatic facts and strained application of the Constitution threw it into question. Nevertheless, its effect …