Law Commons^™

Environmental Integrity Project V. Mccarthy, Lindsay Ward

Public Land & Resources Law Review

In addition to stocking grocery stores and restaurants with beef, chicken and milk, CAFOs generate another product—manure. The EPA’s decision to withdraw a proposed rule compelling CAFOs to provide information to aid the agency in regulating their discharge of pollutants into the waters of the United States was upheld by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The court concluded that the EPA’s decision was “adequately explained” and “coherent,” supported by the administrative record, and did not conflict with existing law.

Inside Regulatory Interpretation: A Research Note, Christopher J. Walker

Michigan Law Review First Impressions

We now live in a regulatory world, where the bulk of federal lawmaking takes place at the bureaucratic level. Gone are the days when statutes and common law predominated. Instead, federal agencies—through rulemaking, adjudication, and other regulatory action—have arguably become the primary lawmakers, with Congress delegating to its bureaucratic agents vast swaths of lawmaking power, the President attempting to exercise some control over this massive regulatory apparatus, and courts struggling to constrain agency lawmaking within statutory and constitutional bounds. This story is not new. Over two decades ago, for instance, Professor Lawson lamented the rise of the administrative state and …

Underground Environmental Regulations: Regulations Imposed As Mitigation Measures Under Ceqa Violate The California Administrative Procedure Act, Jonathan Wood

Jonathan Wood

What happens when an agency adopts a regulation under the California Environmental Quality Act as mitigation for a program’s environmental impact, without complying with the procedural requirements of the California Administrative Procedure Act? According to a recent California Court of Appeal decision – Center for Biological Diversity v. Department of Fish and Wildlife – these mitigation measures, which this article refers to as underground environmental regulations, are invalid. This article defends that interpretation and addresses its consequences for agencies and the regulated public. Although these additional procedural protections benefit regulated parties in a variety of ways, they can also burden …

High Country Conservation Advocates V. United States Forest Service, 52 F. Supp. 3d 1174 (D. Colo. 2014), Kathryn S. Ore

Public Land & Resources Law Review

High Country Conservation Advocates v. United States Forest Service concerns the United States Forest Service’s and the Bureau of Land Management’s authorizations of on-the-ground mining exploration activities in the Sunset Roadless Area of western Colorado. The United States District Court for the District of Colorado’s holding has far-reaching consequences for federal agencies’ analysis and disclosure of impacts on the climate under the National Environmental Policy Act (“NEPA”). In addition to bolstering the Plaintiffs’ recent successes at establishing legal standing to challenge federal agencies’ disclosures and analyses of impacts on the climate under NEPA, High Country is the first case to …

The Nlrb, The Courts, The Administrative Procedures Act, And Chevron: Now And Then, Theodore J. St. Antoine

Articles

Decisions of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), like those of other administrative agencies, are subject to review by the federal judiciary. Standards of review have evolved over time. The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 provides that administrative decisions must be in accord with law and required procedure, not arbitrary or capricious, not contrary to constitutional rights, within an agency's statutory jurisdiction, and supported by substantial evidence. In practice, more attention is paid to two Supreme Court decisions, Skidmore (1944) and Chevron (1984). For many years Chevron seemed the definitive test. A court must follow a clear intent of Congress, …

Codifying Chevmore, Kent H. Barnett

Scholarly Works

This Article considers the significance and promise of Congress’s unprecedented codification of the well-known Chevron and Skidmore judicial-deference doctrines (to which I refer collectively as “Chevmore”). Congress did so in the Dodd-Frank Act by instructing courts to apply the Skidmore deference factors when reviewing certain agency-preemption decisions and by referring to Chevron throughout.

This codification is meaningful because it informs the delegation theory that undergirds Chevmore (i.e., that Congress intends to delegate interpretive primacy over statutory interpretation to agencies under Chevron or courts under Skidmore). Scholars and at least three Supreme Court Justices have decried the judicial inquiry into congressional …

Means And Ends In City Of Arlington V. Fcc: Ignoring The Lawyer's Craft To Reshape The Scope Of Chevron Deference, Michael P. Healy

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

In last year's term, the United States Supreme Court considered the question of the scope of Chevron deference in City of Arlington v. FCC. This article discusses how the decision is an example of the work of an activist Court. The case should have been resolved by a straightforward determination under the analysis of United States v. Mead that Chevron deference simply did not apply to the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) legal determination. The Court ignored this restrained approach to the case and instead addressed the question the Justices desired to decide: the reach of Chevron deference. The article …

The Dean Rusk Award 1984-1985: The 1984 "Country Of Origin" Regulations For Textile Imports: Illegal Administrative Action Under Domestic And International Law?, David Stepp

Georgia Journal of International & Comparative Law

No abstract provided.

The Deeply Flawed Inaugural College Football Playoff: A Call For Structural Changes To Protect Against Undue Commercialization, To Ensure Transparency, And To Systematize Democratic Due Process, Matthew M. Heekin, Bruce W. Burton

Matthew M. Heekin

This article contends that the new College Football Playoff system (CFP)—as formulated and administered in 2014—contains a series of serious flaws. The new CFP system needlessly incorporates an anti-democratic structure, lacks in the transparency required for sustainability in a democratic society, and endangers the longstanding tradition of the student-athlete in American college athletics. This article offers several detailed suggestions—in part modeled on the Administrative Procedures Act—to correct these flaws and move towards an improved CFP system.

Employing the benchmarks of television viewership and advertising revenues, some have declared the inaugural 2014 College Football Playoff a success. From the purely commercial …

The Rise And Fall Of Chevron In Tax: From The Early Days To King And Beyond, Steve R. Johnson

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Will Uncooperative Federalism Survive Nfib?, Abigail Moncrieff, Jonathan Dinerstein

Faculty Scholarship

In October Term 2012, the Supreme Court decided two cases that are fundamentally at odds: NFIB v. Sebelius and Douglas v. Independent Living Center of Southern California. In NFIB, the Court held that the federal government, at least under some circumstances, may not use the threat of reduced funding in cooperative federalism programs to require states to comply with federal statutory requirements. In Douglas, however, the Court indicated that private litigants should sue federal agencies under the Administrative Procedure Act if those agencies refuse to enforce federal statutory requirements against the states. The problem is that the withdrawal of funding …

Constituencies And Contemporaneousness In Reason-Giving: Thoughts And Direction After T-Mobile, Donald J. Kochan

Donald J. Kochan