Administrative Law Commons^™

Abbott Labs V. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967), Aaron-Andrew P. Bruhl

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Overseers Or "The Deciders" – The Courts In Administrative Law, Peter L. Strauss

Faculty Scholarship

For the second time in a short period, Professors Miles and Sunstein have brought powerful tools of statistical analysis and diligent coding of circuit court of appeals opinions together to demonstrate what the Realists long ago taught us to suspect, that significant elements of judging can be explained in terms of the jurist's political world view – that the tension between law and politics is alive in judicial work as elsewhere and that it is only an aspiration to seek a world of laws and not of men. Elements of their work, though, appear as if in criticism of contemporary …

Disability, Equipment Barriers And Women’S Health: Using The Ada To Provide Meaningful Access, Elizabeth Pendo

Articles

It is well-known that people with disabilities face multiple barriers to adequate health care, including lower average incomes, disproportionate poverty, and issues with insurance coverage. This article focuses on a more fundamental barrier-one that has not been discussed in the legal literature-inaccessible medical equipment and its effect on the delivery of women's health care to millions of women with disabilities .

Strange Bedfellows, David M. Uhlmann

Articles

Environmental protection has not been a priority for the Bush administration, but, contrary to popular perception, criminal prosecution of companies and officials accused of breaking environmental laws has flourished.

Technological Due Process, Danielle K. Citron

Faculty Scholarship

Distinct and complementary procedures for adjudications and rulemaking lie at the heart of twentieth-century administrative law. Due process required agencies to provide individuals notice and an opportunity to be heard. Agencies could foreclose policy issues that individuals might otherwise raise in adjudications through public rulemaking. One system allowed focused advocacy; the other featured broad participation. Each procedural regime compensated for the normative limits of the other. Both depended on clear statements of reason.

The dichotomy between these procedural regimes has become outmoded. This century's automated decision-making systems collapse individual adjudications into rulemaking while adhering to the procedural safeguards of neither. …

Reincarnating The "Major Questions" Exception To Chevron Deference As A Doctrine Of Non-Interference (Or Why Massachusetts V. Epa Got It Wrong), Abigail Moncrieff

Faculty Scholarship

In a pair of cases declaring a major questions exception to Chevron deference, the Supreme Court held that executive agencies may not implement major policy changes without explicit authorization from Congress. But in Massachusetts v. EPA, the Court unceremoniously killed its major questions rule, requiring the EPA to implement one such major policy change. Because the scholarly literature to date has failed to discern a worthy justification for the major questions rule, the academy might be tempted to celebrate the rule's death. This Article, how-ever, argues that the rule ought to be mourned and, indeed, reincarnated. It offers a non-interference …