Administrative Law Commons^™

When The Weeds Strike Back: Rethinking Aphis's Regulation Of Genetically Engineered Plants Post-National Family Farm Coalition V. Vilsack, Reagan Powers

Celebrating WCL Student Authors

No abstract provided.

An Austrian Approach To Accounting Regulation: How Policy Intervention Distorts The Market For Assurance Services, Kyan Howe

Student Scholarship

This thesis applies the causal-realist method of the Austrian School of Economics to the market for assurance services in the United States. The central argument is that post-crisis accounting regulation has systematically distorted the incentive structures of independent public accounting firms in ways regulators do not predict and cannot fully control. Financial crises, properly understood through Austrian Business Cycle Theory, originate in monetary distortions rather than market failure. Post-crisis regulatory responses nonetheless target the profession rather than the underlying distortion, introducing rules that alter the institutional constraints within which auditors exercise professional judgment.

The thesis develops a judgment-based equation of …

Between Seminole Rock And A Hard(Er) Place: A New(Er) Approach To Agency Deference, Kevin O. Leske

Catholic University Law Review

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the United States Supreme Court in 2024 overruled Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., ending the Chevron doctrine’s reign as the applicable rule for courts to use in reviewing agency interpretations of their authorizing statute. Although Chevron’s demise was no great surprise, the Court’s decision leaves myriad questions that may take decades to answer. The most pressing question is: what is now the precise standard that courts must apply to determine statutory meaning in these cases? But there is a related question that is equally important to our ever-changing …

Regulatory History And Judicial Review, Todd Phillips, Anthony L. Moffa

Faculty Publications

The Administrative Procedure Act requires federal agencies to simply "incorporate in the rules adopted a concise general statement of their basis and purpose" after they receive comments from the public, and the Supreme Court ruled in Overton Park that courts are to adjudicate whether rules are arbitrary and capricious based on agencies' contemporaneous rationales. Judge-created doctrines incentivize agencies to rely on these "concise" statements to elucidate their rationales, and as a result, rulemaking preambles have ballooned in size as agencies seek to insulate themselves from critical courts.

This article contends that although the APA's statutory requirement is in tension with …

Brief Of Amici Curiae Contract Law Scholars Mark Gergen, Gregory Klass, And Daniel Markovits In Support Of Plaintiffs-Appellants And Reversal, Vera Institute Of Justice V. Department Of Justice, No. 25-5248 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 19, 2025), Mark Gergen, Gregory Klass, Daniel Markovits

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

In Vera Institute of Justice v. Department of Justice, as in a raft of other cases involving constitutional, statutory, and regulatory challenges to the rapid mass cancellation of federal grants or grant programs, the government has deployed jurisdictional arguments in an effort to restrict the judiciary’s ability to review the legality of executive actions. Specifically, the government has attempted to confine jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ claims to the Federal Court of Claims, which is powerless to remedy the alleged violations. The arguments by which the government would deny judicial review of the plaintiffs’ claims conflate two distinct considerations: first, …

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 …

The Perils Of Pseudo-Textualism, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah

Articles

How much freedom does the IRS have to interpret the code?

In recent years, the Supreme Court and lower courts have put significant barriers in front of the IRS’s ability to interpret the code as it wishes. The question is to what extent the IRS can live with the barriers of textualism, nondeference, the major questions doctrine, nondelegation, and the Administrative Procedure Act. Of these, textualism seems to be the most problematic because it is the hardest to fix. The major questions doctrine rarely applies to statutory tax cases. Nondeference based on Loper Bright can be restricted by Congress adding …

Chevron Deference Is Dead, Long Live Deference, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The demise of Chevron deference standing alone may turn out to be much less important for the future of administrative law and agency regulation than many believe. The Court explicitly approved of deference under the Skidmore factors, which instruct reviewing courts to “resort for guidance, even on legal questions” to “the interpretations and opinions of the relevant agency, made in pursuance of official duty and based upon specialized experience.”8 Further, the Court had already created numerous limitations to the reach of Chevron deference and, as the Court noted, it had not deferred under Chevron in nearly a decade. Chevron deference …

Arbitrary And Capricious X Artificial Intelligence, Zoe Niesel

Faculty Articles

The "arbitrary and capricious" review standard has been interpreted to govern the judicial review of agency factual findings that are produced through informal rulemaking or informal adjudication. In contrast, agency factual findings that are produced through formal rulemaking or adjudication will be reviewed under the Administrative Procedure Act, Section 706(2)(E), which states that such findings can be set aside if they are "unsupported by substantial evidence." While the standards technically vary-factual findings that are the product of informal procedures will warrant arbitrary and capricious review, while factual findings that are the product of formal procedures will warrant substantial evidence review …

Second-Class Administrative Law: Lincoln V. Vigil'S Puzzling Presumption Of Unreviewability, Matthew B. Lawrence

Faculty Articles

Administrative law ordinarily presumes that someone hurt by “arbitrary and capricious” agency action may seek relief in federal court unless Congress says otherwise. Administrative law does the opposite, however, when the harmful agency action happens to be one “allocating a lump-sum appropriation” (whatever that means). When it comes to spending programs that courts deem to fit in this ill-defined category, agency actions are presumptively immune from judicial review, insulated from the safeguards of administrative law no matter how arbitrary.

This Article looks behind the superficial, technocratic simplicity of the presumption of unreviewability through a novel, person-sensitive study of its origins …

Power Corrupts, Emily S. Bremer

Journal Articles

Administrative agencies bear principal responsibility for keeping the federal government’s promises by giving effect in the real world to the laws Congress enacts. If administrative law’s goal was to help agencies fulfill this responsibility, its lodestar would be a thick concept of administration. But as a field, administrative law today neglects administration, focusing instead on power and the institutions that wield it, particularly the Supreme Court, the President, and Congress. This Essay traces the field’s reorientation from administration to power, beginning with the deportation cases that revealed thinner-than-acknowledged political will behind the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), through the misunderstood shift …

Loper Bright And The Future Of Chevron Deference, Jack M. Beermann

Faculty Scholarship

The question presented in Loper Bright Industries v. Raimondo¹ is “[w]hether the Court should overrule Chevron or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency.” The Court denied certiorari on another question focused on the merits of the case,² indicating that at least four of the Justices are anxious to revisit or at least clarify Chevron. It’s about time, although it’s far from certain that the Court will actually follow through with the promise the certiorari grant indicates.^{3 …}

Interpreting The Administrative Procedure Act: A Literature Review, Christopher J. Walker, Scott Macguidwin

Law & Economics Working Papers

The modern administrative state has changed substantially since Congress enacted the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in 1946. Yet Congress has done little to modernize the APA in those intervening seventy-seven years. That does not mean the APA has remained unchanged. Federal courts have substantially refashioned the APA’s requirements for administrative procedure and judicial review of agency action. Perhaps unsurprisingly, calls to return to either the statutory text or the original meaning (or both) have intensified in recent years. “APA originalism” projects abound.

As part of the Notre Dame Law Review’s Symposium on the History of the Ad- ministrative Procedure Act …

Power Corrupts, Emily S. Bremer

Journal Articles

Administrative law today neglects administration, focusing instead on power and the institutions that wield it, particularly the Supreme Court, the president, and Congress. Tracing the field’s reorientation—from the New Deal–era cases that revealed the thin political will behind the Administrative Procedure Act to the emergence of the Chevron doctrine—this paper argues that administrative law’s obsession with power corrupts the field.

Vacatur, Nationwide Injunctions, And The Evolving Apa, Ronald M. Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

The courts’ growing use of universal or nationwide injunctions to invalidate agency rules that they find to be unlawful has given rise to concern that such injunctions circumvent dialogue among the circuits, promote forum-shopping, and leave too much power in the hands of individual judges. Some scholars, joined by the Department of Justice, have argued that such judicial decisions should be limited through restrictive interpretations of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).

This article takes issue with these authorities. It argues that the courts’ use of the APA to vacate a rule as a whole—as opposed to merely enjoining application of …

Interpreting The Administrative Procedure Act: A Literature Review, Christopher J. Walker

Articles

The modern administrative state has changed substantially since Congress enacted the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in 1946. Yet Congress has done little to modernize the APA in those intervening seventy-seven years. That does not mean the APA has remained unchanged. Federal courts have substantially refashioned the APA’s requirements for administrative procedure and judicial review of agency action. Perhaps unsurprisingly, calls to return to either the statutory text or the original meaning (or both) have intensified in recent years. “APA originalism” projects abound.

As part of the Notre Dame Law Review’s Symposium on the History of the Administrative Procedure Act and …

The Importance Of Looking Under The 'Administrative Hood': A Case Study Of The National Waters Protection Rule, Nicholas S. Bryner, Victor Byers Flatt

Journal Articles

In an era of legislative gridlock, policy by administrative action has expanded, with major swings occurring when the political party of the presidency changes. These policy disputes have spilled into the third branch with a concomitant increase in legal challenges seeking judicial review of such actions. At the same time, both Republican and Democratic Administrations have made cost-benefit analysis the currency of federal rulemaking in the executive branch.

The combination of the expansion of cost-benefit analysis and the increased litigation over rulemaking has increased the importance of economic and scientific justifications in both the promulgation and revision of administrative actions. …

The Force Of Law After Kisor, Beau J. Baumann

Pace Law Review

No abstract provided.

Requiring The Executive To Turn Square Corners: The Supreme Court Increases Agency Accountability In Department Of Homeland Security V. Regents Of The University Of California, Claudia J. Bernstein

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

Administrative agencies frequently promulgate rules that have dramatic effects on peoples’ lives. Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (“DACA”) is one such example. DACA grants certain unlawful immigrants a temporary reprieve from deportation, as well as ancillary benefits such as work permits. In 2017, the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) sought to rescind DACA on the basis that the program violates the Immigration and Nationality Act.

This Comment analyzes the recent Supreme Court decision about DACA’s recission in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of University of California. In rejecting DHS’s attempt to rescind DACA, the Court strengthened agency accountability …

Introduction To The Bremer-Kovacs Collection: Historic Documents Related To The Administrative Procedure Act Of 1946 (Heinonline 2021), Emily S. Bremer, Kathryn E. Kovacs

Journal Articles

Few statutes have a legislative history as rich, varied, and sprawling as the Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 (APA). In recent years, courts and scholars have shown increased interest in understanding this history. This is no mean feat. The APA’s history spans nearly two decades, and it includes numerous failed bills, a presidential veto, and a full panoply of congressional documents. In addition, much of the most crucial documentation underlying the APA was produced outside of Congress—by the executive branch—and even outside of government—by the American Bar Association. Identifying and locating all the relevant documents is difficult. Understanding each piece …

The Evolving Apa And The Originalist Challenge, Ronald M. Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

This article, written for a symposium marking the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), discusses the manifold ways in which courts have creatively interpreted the APA’s provisions on rulemaking, adjudication, and judicial review. Many of these interpretations seem to be barely, if at all, consistent with the intentions of the Act’s drafters and with standard principles of statutory construction. They can, however, be defended as pragmatic judicial efforts to keep up with the evolving needs of the regulatory state, especially in light of Congress’s persistent failure to take charge of updating the Act on its own. At this …

Department Of Homeland Security V. Regents Of The University Of California And Its Implications, Brian Wolfman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The Trump Administration's effort to get rid of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, failed before the Supreme Court in Department of Homeland Security v. Regents of the University of California, 140 S. Ct. 1891, 1896 (2020). In this essay -- based on a presentation given to an American Bar Association section in September 2020 -- I review DACA, the Supreme Court's decision, and its potential legal implications.

The failure of the Trump Administration to eliminate DACA may have had significant political consequences, and it surely had immediate and momentous consequences for many of DACA’s hundreds of thousands …

Informal And Formal Adjudication: Consecutive Stages, Not Alternative Modes, Emily S. Bremer

Journal Articles

Here I will suggest to you that the Administrative Procedure Act’s long tenure and deep familiarity have allowed administrative law to forget an essential concept upon which the statute was predicated. Rediscovering that concept sheds welcome light on the APA’s adjudication provisions.

Gundy V. United States: How Justice Gorsuch’S Dissent And Changing Judicial Philosophy In Federal Courts May Lead To A Revived Nondelegation Doctrine And Diminish The Purpose Of The Administrative Procedure Act, Zachary Pfrang Olvera

St. Mary's Law Journal

Abstract forthcoming.

The Apa And The Assault On Deference, Ronald Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

Recently, in Kisor v. Wilkie, a concurring opinion by Justice Gorsuch argued at length that § 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act prohibits judicial deference to administrative interpretations of law. That section states that “the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law.” This issue remained unresolved in Kisor, but the Supreme Court may well return to it soon as a potential argument against the validity of Chevron deference. Although a substantial academic literature has supported Gorsuch’s position on the APA question, this article disagrees with it. It argues that the text of § 706, surrounding statutory provisions, the …

The D.C. Circuit Undermines Direct Final Rulemaking, Ronald Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

Twenty-five years ago, the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) brought the technique of “direct final rulemaking” to the attention of the administrative law community. Since that time, agencies have used the technique thousands of times to adopt noncontroversial regulations on an expedited basis. But its legality depends on a creative reading of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). A recent D.C. Circuit case, applying the APA in a manner that overlooked the distinctive features of this device, has exposed this vulnerability and may well have seriously undermined the viability of the practice.

This column criticizes a case that came …

The Trump Administration Versus The Administrative State: A Response To Professor Buzbee's Deregulatory Splintering, Rebecca Bratspies

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Response To William W. Buzbee, Deregulatory Splintering: What Might The Other Side Say?, Todd D. Rakoff

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Regulatory Accoutability Act Loses Steam But The Trump Executive Order On Alj Selection Upturned 71 Years Of Practice, Jeffery S. Lubbers

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.

Comments On Executive Ruilemaking And Democratic Legitimacy: "Reform" In The United States And The United Kingdom's Brexit Bt Susan Rose-Ackerman, Nicholas Almendares

Chicago-Kent Law Review

No abstract provided.