Administrative Law Commons^™

Bank Supervision And Article Ii, Kathryn Judge

Faculty Scholarship

The administrative state is again at a cross roads. The Supreme Court seems poised to continue its march toward trying to fit all of government neatly into one of the three constitutionally enumerated branches. An important front of this shift has been a flattening of the mechanisms through which officers of the United States may be held appropriately accountable for their actions. Waning are the days when Congress had the flexibility to create the institutions it believed were “necessary and proper” for carrying into execution important policy aims and to determine the appropriate mechanisms for accountability in conjunction with considering …

Dark Patterns As Disloyal Design, Johanna Gunawan, Woodrow Hartzog, Neil Richards, David Choffnes, Christo Wilson

Faculty Scholarship

Lawmakers have started to regulate “dark patterns,” understood to be design practices meant to influence technology users’ decisions through manipulative or deceptive means. Most agree that dark patterns are undesirable, but open questions remain as to which design choices should be subjected to scrutiny, much less the best way to regulate them.

In this Article, we propose adapting the concept of dark patterns to better fit legal frameworks. Critics allege that the legal conceptualizations of dark patterns are overbroad, impractical, and counterproductive. We argue that law and policy conceptualizations of dark patterns suffer from three deficiencies: First, dark patterns lack …

A Historical Case For A Robust But Non-Remedial Seventh Amendment, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

In Jarkesy, the Supreme Court rightly held that the Seventh Amendment required a jury trial for a case fundamentally similar to common law fraud, and it rightly limited the scope of the “public rights” exception to the Seventh Amendment. Grounded in historical and originalist methods, this essay makes four suggestions after Jarkesy:

1. Following Jarkesy, the judiciary should continue a more robust enforcement of the Seventh Amendment right to a jury trial. The courts should eliminate the “public rights” exception to the Seventh Amendment, which does not appear to have an original link to the Seventh Amendment. The …

The Administrative State's Second Face, Emily R. Chertoff, Jessica Bulman-Pozen

Faculty Scholarship

We often assume that there is one administrative state, with one body of administrative law that governs it. In fact, the administrative state has two distinct faces: one turned toward regulation and benefits distribution, and one turned toward physical force and surveillance. The two faces are growing further apart under the Roberts Court, which has hemmed in the first face with decisions like Loper Bright while showing solicitude for national security and law enforcement agencies.

This Article delineates the two faces of the administrative state. It provides a descriptive account of the second face and the distinctive administrative law that …

Presidential Supremacy Over Administrative Agencies, Gary Gensler, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

In the United States, the public has long benefited from the role played by administrative agencies with a degree of autonomy from the White House, each agency with distinct duties and authorities to implement the law as set out by Congress.

In its first hundred days, the second Trump administration has moved rapidly to centralise control over all administrative agencies, including so-called independent agencies, which have long operated at a greater remove from the White House than ‘executive’ agencies like the Department of State and the Department of Commerce. The administration is asserting an interpretation of the Constitution known as …

Administrative Law And The Pandemic, Gillian E. Metzger

Faculty Scholarship

American administrative law’s relationship to change is, as they say, compli­cated. On the one hand, continual evolution has been an endemic feature of American administrative law. Doctrines such as Chevron deference to agency statutory interpretations were born, grew, and declined in just the period from the 1980s to today. On the other, the United States (US) Supreme Court regularly rejects such common law development in administrative law as illegitimate and insists that federal judges must adhere to the original terms of the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and other statutes, unless the Constitution requires otherwise. And to this day scholars …

Tomorrow’S Climate Law, Today, Daniel E. Walters

Faculty Scholarship

The prospects for domestic legislation or international treaties that would require governments, businesses, and individuals to stop emitting the greenhouse gases that cause global climate change are particularly bleak these days. Even as the United States has recently passed its most ambitious climate legislation to date in the Inflation Reduction Act and related “green industrial policy” legislation, these successes were ultimately a compromise with politicians who refused to consider more direct controls on emissions. Assuming they survive the second Trump Administration, the green subsidies and nudges contained in these laws, coupled with a groundswell of private environmental governance, will do …

Capital Formation, The Sec, And Accredited Investors, Neal F. Newman, Lawrence J. Trautman, Brian Elzweig

Faculty Scholarship

Protecting the investing public, while simultaneously facilitating the efficient flow of capital needed by all new and growing businesses continues as a primary responsibility of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Enhancing the capital formation process is a necessary step in the creation of jobs and growth of any economy. Central to the SEC’s regulatory schematic is the proposition that some particularly sophisticated and wealthy investors require less protection than those with less knowledge, experience, and resources. During December 2023, for just the third time, the SEC staff issued a report examining the status of the natural person accredited …

The Lost English Roots Of Notice-And-Comment Rulemaking, Rephael G. Stern

Faculty Scholarship

Notice-and-comment rulemaking is arguably the most important procedure in the modern administrative state. Influential accounts even frame it as the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act’s “most important idea.” But its historical origins are obscure. Scholars have variously suggested that it grew out of the constitutionally sanctioned practice of congressional petitioning, organically developed from the practices of nineteenth-century agencies, or was influenced by German conceptions of administrative rulemaking. These histories, however, are incomplete. Using original archival research, this Article demonstrates that notice-and-comment rulemaking was the product of a series of American transplantations of English rulemaking procedures that developed in the late nineteenth …

Working With Statutes, Anya Bernstein, Cristina Rodriguez

Faculty Scholarship

In its decision overruling the Chevron doctrine—which directed judges to accept an agency’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutory language—the Supreme Court declares: “[A]gencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities. Courts do.” This Article shows why this statement exhibits a profoundly blinkered judicial hubris. Our interview-based empirical study, involving dozens of agency officials across the administrative state, shows agencies’ special, indeed unique, competence in working with statutes to make democratic enactments real.

Agencies, we show, act as a statute’s custodians, managing the statutory regime over a life cycle that exceeds any single governing coalition. Borrowing ideas from private law, …

Against Monetary Primacy, Yair Listokin, Rory Van Loo

Faculty Scholarship

To reduce inflation, the Federal Reserve (Fed) raises interest rates. But every month with high interest rates increases the risk of a devastating recession. Recessions impose not only short-term pain in the form of widespread unemployment but also lifelong harm for many, as vulnerable workers and those who start their careers during a downturn never fully recover. Yet hiking interest rates is the centerpiece of U.S. inflation-fighting policy. When inflation is high, the Fed raises interest rates until inflation is tamed, regardless of the consequent sacrifices. We call this inflation-fighting paradigm “monetary primacy.” Despite its great risks, monetary primacy has …

Legislating For The Future, Jonathan S. Gould, Rory Van Loo

Faculty Scholarship

Public policy must address threats that will manifest in the future. Legislation enacted today affects the severity of tomorrow’s harms arising from biotechnology, climate change, and artificial intelligence. This Essay focuses on Congress’s capacity to confront future threats. It uses a detailed case study of financial crises to show the limits and possibilities of legislation to prevent future catastrophes. By paying insufficient attention to Congress, the existing literature does not recognize the full nature and extent of the institutional challenges in regulating systemic risk. Fully recognizing those challenges reveals important design insights for future-risk legislation.

We first examine Congress as …

What The Hell Is The Major Questions Doctrine?, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

Anita S. Krishnakumar, What the New Major Questions Doctrine Is Not, 92 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1117 (2024).

When the sun sets in New York City, it rises in Tokyo. Okay, maybe not exactly, but you get the idea: setting somewhere, rising somewhere else. Now substitute Chevron for N.Y.C. and the Major Questions Doctrine for Tokyo. For the past forty years, administrative law scholars have been arguing over Chevron, and now that the sun has set on that doctrine, it’s time to turn our attention to the new rising sun, the Major Questions Doctrine (“MQD”). The sudden emergence …

Who Teaches Consumer Law?, Jeff Sovern

Faculty Scholarship

This paper reports on a survey of 31 law professors teaching consumer protection law conducted in connection with the Center for Consumer Law & Economic Justice at the UC Berkeley School of Law and the Center for Consumer Law at the University of Houston Law Center’s 2024 Teaching Consumer Law Conference. Surveys posed at previous editions of the Teaching Consumer Law Conference focused largely on what topics are covered in consumer law courses. The 2024 iteration of the survey instead explored responding professors’ goals in consumer law courses and experiences with and views on consumer law matters. Among the findings: …

Cost–Benefit Analysis, Matthew D. Adler

Faculty Scholarship

This chapter will address the place of cost–benefit analysis (CBA) in constitutional law, by way of a case study. I’ll describe, and puzzle over, CBA’s absence from most U.S. constitutional doctrines, notwithstanding its major role in U.S. administrative law. The general questions that I seek to illuminate are by no means limited to the U.S. How might CBA figure within the tests that constitutional courts use to adjudicate alleged violations of constitutional rights? How might it serve to determine the structure of constitutional institutions? Would it be justified for CBA to play these doctrinal roles? But these general questions are …

Presidential Regulation, Timothy Meyer, Ganesh Sitaraman

Faculty Scholarship

This Article documents and analyzes the rise of a new mode of economic governance: presidential regulation. Today, the President regularly bypasses not only Congress but also the executive branch’s own administrative agencies and directly imposes sweeping new economic regulations. President Biden, for instance, created new regulatory regimes governing producers of artificial-intelligence technologies, companies that trade in or hold the personal information of U.S. citizens, and companies that can increase the production of energy-efficient equipment and technology. During his first term, President Trump regulated the kinds of technologies that U.S. telecommunications companies can buy and sell, placed restrictions on the electrical …

The Solicitor General, Consistency, And Credibility, Margaret H. Lemos, Deborah A. Widiss

Faculty Scholarship

This Article offers the first comprehensive look at cases in which the Solicitor General (SG) rejects a legal argument offered on behalf of the United States in prior litigation. Such reversals have received considerable attention in recent years, as shifts in presidential administrations have produced multiple high-profile “flip-flops”—as the Justices sometimes call them—by the SG. Even those observers who defend the SG, including veterans of the office, caution that inconsistency in legal argument poses a threat to the SG’s credibility with the Court. Our goal is to better understand the circumstances that lead the SG to change its position on …

Interplanetary Risk Regulation, Jonathan B. Wiener, Charles (Chase) Hamilton

Faculty Scholarship

Space exploration promises new opportunities but also new risks. After centuries of national settlements and international conflicts on Earth, and the Cold War era of two great power states racing to the Moon, today we see a rapidly proliferating arena of actors, both governmental and non-governmental, undertaking bold new ventures off-Earth while posing an array of new risks. These multiple activities, actors, and risks raise the prospects of regulatory gaps, costs, conflicts, and complexities that warrant reconsideration and renovation of legacy legal regimes such as the international space law agreements. New approaches are needed, beyond current national and international law, …

Doge's Matrix Structure And Presidential Power, Jason Marisam

Faculty Scholarship

At the start of his second term, President Trump created the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), a novel White House entity tasked with reshaping the federal bureaucracy. Far more than a traditional advisory commission, DOGE employed a matrix structure that embedded staff across executive agencies, establishing dual reporting lines to both agency heads and the White House. This essay argues that DOGE’s organizational design represents a structural innovation in presidential control and an evolution of the longstanding “czar” model. Drawing on organizational and principal-agent theories, the essay explores how the matrix structure enhanced the President’s capacity to monitor agency behavior, …

Rulemaking Petitions In A World Without Deference To Agencies: A New Lease On Life?, Daniel E. Walters

Faculty Scholarship

Often overlooked in the study and practice of administrative law, rulemaking petitions are means by which interested persons can prompt federal agencies to implement the statutes they administer in particular ways. After the Supreme Court’s 2024 decisions in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, 144 S. Ct. 2244 (2024), and Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency, 144 S. Ct. 2040 (2024), rulemaking petitions are about to experience a renaissance—one that could reshape environmental law, should environmental advocates choose to leverage the procedure.

Self-Regulation In Emerging And Innovative Industries, Daniel E. Walters, Hannah J. Wiseman

Faculty Scholarship

Self-regulation—governance of firm behavior by private entities—has a long history both in the United States and globally, and there is an extensive literature on the topic. But there has been far less attention paid to the role self-regulation can play in spurring and enabling innovation and growth within emerging industries. These industries—both currently ascendant ones such as hydrogen and artificial intelligence, as well as formerly new (but now well established) activities in hydraulic fracturing and Internet communications—plausibly benefit from self-regulation’s ability to coordinate economic actors and reassure often skeptical publics. Examining the ways that self-regulation impacts this special type of …

The Great Unsettling: Administrative Governance After Loper Bright, Cary Coglianese, Daniel E. Walters

Faculty Scholarship

“Chevron is overruled.” These three words surely captured more attention than any others in the U.S. Supreme Court’s thirty-five-page opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. For forty years, the Chevron doctrine had been virtually synonymous with administrative law. Now that the Court has taken a step that many scholars thought unfathomable even just a few years ago, speculation abounds about the possible downstream impacts of Loper Bright on both what agencies will be able to do in the future and how lower courts will respond when reviewing agency action. The vast majority of early expert commentaries suggest …

How Artificial Intelligence Will Shape Securities Regulation, Gabriel Rauterberg

Faculty Scholarship

How will the increasing prevalence and sophistication of artificial intelligence (AI) change the doctrine and practice of securities law? My main thesis is that it will push securities regulation toward a more systems-oriented approach. This approach will replace securities law’s emphasis, in areas like manipulation, on forms of enforcement targeted at specific individuals and accompanied by punitive sanctions with a greater focus on ex ante rules designed to shape an ecology of actors and information.

Amicus In Wilcox V. Trump On Presidential Removal And Unitary Executive Theorists’ Errors, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

As courts ask whether Free Enterprise and Seila Law call into question Humphrey’s Executor and independent officers or agencies, the more immediate questions should be focused on new historical evidence and new fact-checking finding pervasive and repeated historical errors and misinterpretations at the foundation of the unitary executive theory of removal.

Since the Supreme Court decided Seila Law, a wave of new historical research has shown that the Founding generation did not understand Article II to grant the President an indefeasible removal power over executive officials. In response, pro-unitary executive scholars have tried to offer new historical support. That …

Competitive Populism, Madhav Khosla

Faculty Scholarship

The preoccupation of comparative constitutional lawyers over the past decade or so has been the rise of authoritarian populism. This chapter focuses on one possible pathway that might follow our present political moment: competitive populism. This phase will involve a certain kind of institutional vacuum: the prior institutions, associated with liberal constitutional democracy, will not lend themselves to being rebooted. In reflecting on this possible future, this chapter explores the nature and form of deinstitutionalization that has occurred under authoritarian populism, and the elements that define the emerging constitutional framework. The implication here is that what will be crucial …

The Judicial Administrative Power, Jonathan Petkun, Joseph Schottenfeld

Faculty Scholarship

Article III of the Constitution confines the “judicial Power of the United States” to the adjudication of “cases” and “controversies.” In practice, however, federal judges exercise control over, and spend their scarce time on, a wide range of activities that traverse far beyond any individual adjudication. Typically classified as a form of “judicial administration,” these activities span everything from promulgating the rules of the various federal courts to overseeing federal pretrial detention services or choosing federal public defenders.

This Article describes how judges became involved in these nonadjudicatory Article III activities, clarifies the activities’ relationship to Article III adjudication, and …

The Major Questions Doctrine, Post-Chevron?: Skidmore, Loper-Bright, And A Good-Faith Emergency Question Doctrine, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

When my students and colleagues fretted about Chevron's fate, I have said, "Worry less. Skid-more." Just as old Skidmore "weight" or "respect" returns post-Chevron, the new (and newer) major questions doctrine(s) survive as a reason to give less weight to an agency interpretation. This symposium essay suggests a special role for the post-Chevron major questions doctrine: an Emergency Questions Doctrine. When the executive asserts an emergency power, when the statutory basis is open-ended (often for very good reasons), majorness means less deference to simple and fast textualism, and more time for courts to engage in deeper purposivism to …

Judicial Accountability, Anya Bernstein

Faculty Scholarship

Judicial decisions are moving ever more authority over regulatory statutes away from agencies and to courts instead. One justification offered for this power transfer: agencies lack the accountability of courts. This Article takes up that claim, assessing the institutions’ relative capacities for accountability in their authoritative interpretations of regulatory statutes—agency regulations and court rulings. I take accountability to involve actors undertaking reasoned decisionmaking grounded in publicly recognized values and facts and justifying their decisions to others who can evaluate, influence, or override those judgments. Accountability thus involves a give and take: it gives an account of government reasoning to a …

Not-So-Special Solicitude, Katherine Mims Crocker

Faculty Scholarship

In a high-profile case last term about state standing to sue in federal court, Justice Gorsuch deemed it “hard not to wonder why” the majority said “nothing about ‘special solicitude.’” The silence was indeed surprising, for in a landmark decision several years earlier, the Supreme Court had declared that states were “entitled to special solicitude”—presumably meaning some sort of preferential treatment—“in [the] standing analysis.” And since then, commentators had depicted the concept as permitting opportunistic states to wage ideological crusades in courts across the country, especially through administrative-law attacks on federal-government defendants.

But what if “special solicitude” is not so …

Ai Regulation Has Its Own Alignment Problem: The Technical And Institutional Feasibility Of Disclosure, Registration, Licensing, And Auditing, Neel Guha, Christie M. Lawrence, Lindsey A. Gailmard, Kit T. Rodolfa, Faiz Surani, Rishi Bommasani, Inioluwa Deborah Raji, Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, Colleen Honigsberg, Percy Liang, Daniel E. Ho

Faculty Scholarship

Calls for regulating artificial intelligence (“AI”) are widespread, but there remains little consensus on both the specific harms that regulation can and should address and the appropriate regulatory actions to take. Computer scientists propose technical solutions that may be infeasible or illegal; lawyers propose regulation that may be technically impossible; and commentators propose policies that may backfire. AI regulation, in that sense, has its own alignment problem, in which proposed interventions are often misaligned with societal values.This Article assesses the alignment and technical and institutional feasibility of four dominant proposals for AI regulation in the United States: disclosure, registration, licensing, …