Administrative Law Commons^™

Who Counts As A "Reasonable Employee"? The Third Circuit's Bungling Of Section 8(A)(1) Violations, Ben Milstein

Washington Law Review

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects private employees’ right to unionize and collectively bargain with their employers. Section 7 of the NLRA guarantees employees the right to self-organize labor unions, while section 8 outlines numerous unfair labor practices. Specifically, section 8(a)(1) bans employer interference, coercion, or restraint of any section 7 rights. In a 2022 case, FDRLST Media v. NLRB, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) finding that FDRLST Media’s executive officer’s tweet constituted a section 8(a)(1) violation. This Comment examines the history of section 8(a)(1) violations, specifically discussing the widely …

Red, White-, And Blue-Collar Crime: Federal Sentencing Practices Among White-Collar And Blue-Collar Offenders, Henna Judge

Fordham Law Review

Under the current federal sentencing regime, district courts exercise immense amounts of discretion when sentencing. Though strict adherence to the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) was once mandatory, courts must now use these Guidelines as an advisory starting point and make a series of fact-specific determinations when sentencing a defendant. Though judicial discretion in this realm aids in preventing undue reliance on Guidelines-range recommendations that can lack nuance, it also invites bias.

In recent years, scholars and courts alike have called attention to a potential disparity in the way blue-collar and white-collar offenders are sentenced. This Note examines relevant …

Not So Firmly Settled: How The Inconsistent Jurisprudence Of The Firm Resettlement Bar Serves As A Tool For Asylum Seeker Exclusion, Caroline V. Garrido

Fordham Law Review

The firm resettlement bar to asylum, designed to limit protections to those without refuge elsewhere, has become a source of inconsistency, confusion, and exclusion in U.S. asylum law. Circuit courts have adopted two different approaches for determining whether an asylum seeker has firmly resettled in a third country. Despite the Board of Immigration Appeals’ attempt to unify these approaches through the introduction of a burden-shifting framework, courts remain divided, and there is no clear guidance on what constitutes firm resettlement. This Note argues that this lack of guidance has led to inconsistent court holdings and interpretations that conflict with the …

Institutional Sustainability In Ai Governance: Comparing Paths In The Eu, Japan, And Taiwan, Kuan-Wei Chen

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

This article explores the concept of institutional sustainability in AI governance by comparing the approaches in the European Union, Japan, and Taiwan. It begins by arguing that the relationship between AI and sustainability extends beyond environmental concerns, encompassing the sustainability of governance institutions themselves. The article posits that institutional sustainability, referring to the capacity of governance frameworks to remain effective over time, is essential in the context of rapidly evolving and future-oriented AI governance. The analysis proceeds by examining the EU’s strategy of normative anchoring through legal codification, Japan’s agile governance model based on collaboration and coordination, and Taiwan’s digital …

Doktrin Penyalahgunaan Hak (Abus Des Droit), Syukron Salam

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The present article examines the emergence of the doctrine of abus de droit in France in the mid-twentieth century through an analysis of key judicial decisions and the debates that followed them. The study commences with an exposition of the manner in which the evolution of capitalism, concomitant with the escalating economic disparity and the propagation of societal challenges, has influenced the judicial approach to the abstract Roman-law tradition of absolute rights. In light of this, the article contends that the civil-law tradition exhibited a fundamental flaw in its conceptualisation of rights as absolute, thereby overlooking objections that were firmly …

Politik Hukum Kedudukan Wakil Presiden Dalam Badan Pengarah Percepatan Pembangunan Otonomi Khusus Papua, Maleakhi Samuel Pasalli, Yamuna Nurafifah, Pranaldo Gunawan

Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan

The legal policy regarding the amendment of Law Number 21 of 2001 into Law Number 2 of 2021 concerning Special Autonomy for Papua marks a paradigm shift from asymmetric decentralization towards controlled autonomy or leading to the centralization of power, notably through the establishment of the Steering Committee for Acceleration of Development of Special Autonomy for Papua (BP3OKP), which is chaired directly by the Vice President. This research is motivated by juridical issues wherein the Academic Paper (Naskah Akademik) of the amendment fails to provide scientific justification regarding the urgency of establishing this special body or the involvement of the …

Auer Deference: He Who Writes The Law Must Not Adjudge Its Violation, William G. Kennedy

MC Law Review

This Comment explores Auer deference and its application to the Sentencing Guidelines, the Sentencing Commission, and its commentary. Auer deference, in its simplest form, requires courts to give controlling weight to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. Following the Court’s decision in Kisor—expressly limiting Auer’s application, the circuit courts have disagreed on the applicability of Auer to the Sentencing Commission’s commentary regarding career offender designation. This disagreement begs for an appearance before the Court of Last Resort, but until that day, the courts must rigidly apply Kisor to …

Separation-Of-Powers Lochnerism, Andrea Scoseria Katz

Fordham Law Review

One hundred and twenty years ago, in 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered one of the single most notorious opinions in history, striking down a New York labor law for violating the right to contract—a right found nowhere in the text of the Constitution. Though the era of Lochner v. New York is well past us, the judicial impulses that gave rise to the case remain. With a new champion in the Roberts Court, Lochnerism is alive and well, deployed in a new context to redefine the relationships between the president, Congress, federal agencies, and the courts.

Bringing together two …

National Values Matter For Ai: Comparative Analysis Of Ai Regulations In The Us, The Eu, And China, Kaori (Furuya) Kawaguchi

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to evolve rapidly, governments worldwide face increasing pressure to regulate it. This Article focuses on regulatory approaches to AI in the United States, the European Union, and China, examining the underlying rationales: why have they taken these approaches? Each jurisdiction’s unique political institutions, historical preferences, and strategic priorities shape its approach to governance. In particular, the values the jurisdiction expects in technology shape its regulation. The US adopts a decentralized, innovation-friendly model rooted in reliance on market and self-regulation in industries with its strong trust in laissez-faire philosophy; the EU asserts global leadership in regulations …

Turbulence In The Courts: Jetblue Suffers From Faulty Antitrust Actions, Rudolph Veiga

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Recently, the Department of Justice has become the leading force behind antitrust challenges against airline alliances and mergers. Unfortunately, it is difficult for someone to determine when the department will challenge an airline joint venture because the department has not consistently challenged all alliances or mergers over the last few years. JetBlue Airways defended itself against two different antitrust challenges by the department—one against the Northeast Alliance with American Airlines, and one against the acquisition of Spirit Airlines—and JetBlue lost both. The Department of Justice did not challenge the merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines, which was finalized just …

Regulatory Settlement, Stare Decisis, And Loper Bright, Lisa Schultz Bressman, Kevin M. Stack

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In Loper Bright v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court adopted and deployed a particular narrative about agency action in support of overruling Chevron: Agencies reverse their own statutory interpretations “as much as [they] like[],” creating pervasive instability in the law, thereby destroying private reliance interests. Based on a study of two decades of agency regulations affirmed by the D.C. Circuit under Chevron, we show how infrequently agencies reversed their interpretive positions. Our study suggests that the Court’s regulatory “whiplash” narrative is overstated and that there is an underappreciated institutional settlement for notice-and-comment rules under Chevron. Identifying this regulatory settlement …

The Post-Chevron Law Of Deference For Investor-State Arbitration, Won L. Kidane

Faculty Publications

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the United States Supreme Court clarified the “law of deference” built “on the foundation laid in Chevron.” The American conception of the law of deference, long solidified as the Chevron doctrine, has had extraordinary resonance, having been cited in at least 18,000 cases and 22,000 publications over a period of forty years.

The Court’s overruling of the two-step Chevron analysis for the resolution of statutory ambiguity is the most obvious outcome and is likely to attract the most attention. There is, however, an obscure aspect of the Court’s overruling of Chevron: the clarification of …

General Rulemaking Grants And The Federal Trade Commission, Tamar Katz, Alex Lloyd George, Lev Menand, Tim Wu

Faculty Scholarship

The legal campaign against the administrative state has a new front: general rulemaking provisions. General rulemaking provisions authorize agencies, in an open-ended way, to write rules to carry out Congress’s directives. Administrative agencies have relied on such provisions for decades. But over the last several years, some litigators, scholars, and judges have advanced limiting theories that would, if applied widely, greatly reduce the ability of agencies to execute federal statutes. The leading edge of this campaign is an effort to negate the rulemaking authority of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The reasoning employed by the FTC’s opponents, already adopted by …

Fact Checking Oral Argument In Slaughter, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court heard argument on Monday in Trump v. Slaughter, a case in which the President seeks to override the power of Congress to limit, through legislation, presidential removal of federal administrators. The argument revealed some confusion about the law and history of federal offices and multiple precedents important to resolving the question. This post examines mistakes and misreadings with respect to: the design of the Federal Reserve System; the meaning of a fixed term; and the Court’s decisions in Marbury v. Madison, Ex Parte Hennen, and Parsons v. United States.

Slaughter, Parsons, And The Original Meaning Of A Term Of Years, Jane Manners, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

This term the Supreme Court is hearing argument in two major cases regarding the law of federal offices. One — Trump v. Slaughter — may strip Congress of the power to place any restrictions on the President’s ability to remove administrators at will. Another — Trump v. Cook — will address how such restrictions work, assuming that the President has to follow them.

Quasi-Judicial: A History And Tradition, Beau J. Baumann, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

In challenging the historical assumptions underlying the unitary executive theory, scholars have made several seemingly unrelated discoveries. First, "judicial" power was conceived in English law as a subset of "executive" authority. Second, Congress at or near the Founding insulated certain court-like comissions from presidential control. Finally, the "quasi-judicial" and "quasi-legislative" powers that were central to the holding of Humphrey's Executor flowed from a forgotten nineteenth-century legal tradition was guiding Congress's construction of the modern state. This Essay connects these findings into a single claim: generations of American stretching back past the Founding have instinctively insulated administrators granted quasi-judicial functions from …

Presidential Removal As Article I, Not Article Ii, Gary Lawson, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

As a matter of original public meaning, Article I’s Necessary and Proper clause is the starting point for both Congress’s power to create offices and the limits on that power.

We believe that many legal scholars have demonstrated that, as a matter of original public meaning, the term “executive power” did not imply a presidential removal power, and Article II did not imply an indefeasible (unconditional) presidential removal power. By contrast, Article I’s Necessary and Proper Clause is a basis for limiting congressional power that is more historically grounded in original public meaning and in early practice. Tenure protections and …

Torts And Pesticide Drift: Amending Right-To-Farm Acts In The Wake Of Widespread Dicamba Drift By Nicholas Brown** And Matt Roessing*

Journal of Legal Studies in Business

When crops die in a field prior to harvest, a farmer loses a portion of his salary for that year. When the cause of the crop loss is natural, farmers can usually seek compensation through crop insurance and government commodity support programs. When the crops were lost as a result of pesticide drift, these forms of compensation are not usually available to farmers.1 In order to make up for their losses, farmers can seek damages through judicial redress. For many decades, various state and federal laws have combined to complicate and at times prevent farmers adversely affected by pesticide drift …

Cover Page & Table Of Contents - Volume 23

Journal of Legal Studies in Business

JLSB vol. 23 Title Page & Table of Contents

Incorporating Tax Law Into Legal And Regulatory Environment Of Business Courses

Journal of Legal Studies in Business

No abstract provided.

Too Much, Too Little, Or Just Right? Beyond The Perception (Or Reality) Of Law School Rigor In Teaching Undergraduate Copyright Law

Journal of Legal Studies in Business

No abstract provided.

The Major Question Left For The Roberts Court, Will Chevron Survive?, Caleb B. Childers

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Against Algorithmic Auer Deference, Chad Squitieri

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Trump V. Slaughter: Brief Of Independent Agency Board Members And Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Samuel Bagenstos

Appellate Briefs

Amici are removed board members from independent federal agencies and scholars whose work includes the study of independent agencies and the separation of powers between the President and Congress. Amici advance the view that there are federal agencies whose responsibility for protecting the safety and stability of the national infrastructure or ensuring the structural integrity of government necessitates their independence. Significant negative consequences would likely follow if these agencies were to lose their independence and their work were to become politicized.

The Trump Law Firm Intimidation Policy: A Look Inside The Wreckage, Jacob Burns Center For Ethics In The Practice Of Law, David Mcgowan, Bradley Wendel, Staci Zaretsky

2025–2026 Flyers

The Trump Administration has engaged in what the ABA has called a "Law Firm Intimidation Policy" intended to change how America's largest and most prestigious firms practice law.

The Trump Law Firm Intimidation Policy: A Look Inside The Wreckage, Jacob Burns Center For Ethics In The Practice Of Law, David Mcgowan, W. Bradley Wendel, Staci Zaretsky

2025 Event Invitations

The Trump Administration has engaged in what the ABA has called a “Law Firm Intimidation Policy”; intended to change how America's largest and most prestigious firms practice law.

Nine firms have “settled” with the Administration, while four firms have filed suit to enjoin the Administration's actions, and have won some early victories. Other firms have expressed their opposition to the admiration’s policy in various ways. After more than half a year, what lessons, if any, can be drawn from the bar's response to the Law Firm Intimidation Policy? Were predictions that the Administration's efforts would cause significant harm to the …

West Flagler And The Future Of Sports Betting: Navigating Tribal Sovereignty And The Need For Consumer Protection In A Growing Market, Jake Granese

University of Miami Business Law Review

Sports betting in the United States has exploded in recent years, with a record–breaking $11 billion in revenue in 2023. This growth has inspired state governments to try to leverage this lucrative business. One recent development is the 2021 Gaming Compact between the Seminole Tribe of Florida and the state of Florida. The Compact represents a milestone towards exclusivity in mobile gaming for Native American tribal nations. Under the Compact, the Seminole Tribe receives sports betting exclusivity, for both retail sports wagering and online sports wagering across the state of Florida, in exchange for a revenue sharing arrangement—unlike any other …

The Cost Of Waiting: Navigating The Ftc’S Noncompete Ban And The Risks Of Inaction, Cameron Weiss

University of Miami Business Law Review

This Comment critically examines the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) now–abandoned rule that sought to ban noncompete clauses in employment contracts, emphasizing the limitations of advice provided by attorneys, legal scholars, and experts who advocate for a “wait–and–see” approach during its development and subsequent litigation. Noncompetes, while serving as a tool for employers to safeguard proprietary interests and limit competition, also restrict employee mobility and bargaining power. The FTC’s proposed rule, which aimed to ban most noncompete clauses, faced immediate and substantial legal challenges under the major questions and nondelegation doctrines.

Although the FTC ultimately ceased defending the rule and acceded …

Presidents, Opinions, And Independent Officers, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

The Opinions in Writing Clause is a persistent textual problem for the claim that Article II implies an indefeasible removal power: If the Framers believed they had given the president an unconditional removal power, why would they also specify a lesser power merely to ask for opinions? New historical research confirms this textual problem was also contextual: early state constitutions, the Ratification debates, and the First Congress indicate that the Opinions Clause’s original public meaning signaled independence of department heads, or at least the possibility of congressional requirements like good cause.

Legal scholars have already shown that the texts of …

The Interpretive Foundations Of Arbitrary Or Capricious Review, Alexander Mechanick

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.