Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Administrative Law

2015

Jud Mathews

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Deference Lotteries, Jud Mathews Aug 2015

Deference Lotteries, Jud Mathews

Jud Mathews

When should courts defer to agency interpretations of statutes, and what measure of deference should agencies receive? Administrative law recognizes two main deference doctrines — the generous Chevron standard and the stingier Skidmore standard — but Supreme Court case law has not offered a bright-line rule for when each standard applies.Many observers have concluded that courts’ deference practice is an unpredictable muddle. This Article argues that it is really a lottery, in the sense the term is used in expected utility theory. Agencies cannot predict which deference standard a court will apply or with what effect, but they have a …


Strategic Delegation, Discretion, And Deference: Explaining The Comparative Law Of Administrative Review, Jud Mathews, Nuno M. Garoupa Aug 2015

Strategic Delegation, Discretion, And Deference: Explaining The Comparative Law Of Administrative Review, Jud Mathews, Nuno M. Garoupa

Jud Mathews

This paper offers a theory to explain cross-national variation in administrative law doctrines and practices. Administrative law regimes vary along three primary dimensions: the scope of delegation to agencies, agencies’ exercise of discretion, and judicial practices of deference to agencies. Working with a principal-agent framework, we show how cross-national differences in institutions’ capacities and the environments they face encourage the adoption of divergent strategies that lead to a variety of distinct, stable, equilibrium outcomes. We apply our model to explain patterns of administrative law in the United States, Germany, France, and Commonwealth jurisdictions.


Searching For Proportionality In U.S. Administrative Law, Jud Mathews Dec 2014

Searching For Proportionality In U.S. Administrative Law, Jud Mathews

Jud Mathews

There is no such thing as “proportionality review” in American administrative law, but instead, a number of doctrines that courts deploy to evaluate agency exercises of discretion. In some respects, these frameworks for review resemble proportionality in operation, but there are also notable differences. This essay surveys the doctrines governing judicial review of administrative discretion in the United States, highlighting three distinguishing features of the American approach. First, American judicial review is characterized by a high degree of unpredictability, not only with respect to outcomes, but often with respect to what framework of review is applicable. Second, while classical proportionality …