Administrative Law Commons^™

Legal Summaries Of Administrative Law Cases, Kimberly M. Papadantonakis

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Nonstatutory Judicial Review Of Federal Agency Action: A New Approach To Sovereign Immunity, William P. Hardy

Maine Law Review

In deciding whether to review administrative agency action, an astute court seeks to maintain a delicate balance between over-interference with administration of legislatively created programs and denial of plaintiff's rights. This balancing process historically has been hindered by federal courts treating the doctrine of sovereign immunity as a jurisdictional bar to unconsented suits against the United States Government. Regardless of the validity of a plaintiff's grievance and in spite of the relative infrequency of such suits, the courts adhering to this traditional approach mechanically dismiss such actions solely because they seek relief against the sovereign. A few federal courts have …

Administrative Law: Approaches To Delegation, Maine Law Review

Maine Law Review

As do most state courts, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court purports to require that legislative delegations of power to administrative agencies be accompanied by legislatively articulated "primary standards" sufficient to prohibit arbitrary exercise of administrative discretion. The requirement is rooted in the non-delegation doctrine, once the principal stumbling-block to the creation of an effective administrative arm of government. Originally a liberalization of the non-delegation rule, the primary standards test can become an unwarranted restraint on legislative discretion, particularly when invoked to nullify delegations necessarily broad in scope. Often, the very reason behind a legislature's choice of administrative means to effectuate …

Four Ways To Deconstruct Regulation And Undermine Democracy In The States, Glen Staszewski

William & Mary Law Review

A few years before the Supreme Court formally overruled Chevron, anti-administrative activists successfully prohibited judicial deference to reasonable exercises of interpretive discretion by regulatory agencies in a handful of receptive states. State governments’ treatment of this issue is likely to generate even more attention in Loper Bright’s wake. This Article presents novel case studies of four different ways in which state governments have prohibited deference to state agencies by state courts: (1) judicial decisions in Mississippi and Ohio, (2) a constitutional amendment proposed by an appointed commission and adopted pursuant to the initiative process in Florida, (3) statutes …

Responsive Democracy And The Administrative State, Edward L. Rubin

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

I would like to thank Dean Micheal Scharf and Professor Jonathan Entin for inviting me to Case Western Reserve University School of Law to deliver the Frank J. Battisti Memorial Lecture and thank all of you for attending. It's really a pleasure to be here and to have the opportunity to offer a talk named after such a distinguished jurist. Judge Frank J. Battisti served on the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio for 33 years, and he was chief judge of that court for more than two decades. During his time on the bench, Judge …

Saving Agency Adjudication, Aaron L. Nielson, Christopher J. Walker, Melissa F. Wasserman

Articles

When discussing the federal judiciary, commentators typically fixate on the 800 or so “Article III” judges who are nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate, and enjoy life tenure and salary protection. Yet most federal adjudication does not take place in federal courthouses at all. Instead, it occurs in nondescript hearing rooms in administrative agencies—if not telephonically. Indeed, the more than 12,000 agency adjudicators scattered across the federal government collectively issue millions of decisions per year on subjects ranging from Social Security and veterans benefits to immigration and patent rights. In recent years, however, scholars and agency adjudicators have …

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, …

Stipulations Of Law And Agency Independence, Jack Ferguson

Pepperdine Law Review

The Supreme Court granted certiorari in SEC v. Jarkesy to consider whether good-cause removal protections for SEC administrative law judges violate the Constitution, but ultimately left the question unanswered. The lower court holding that the removal protections are unconstitutional remains on the books for now, neither affirmed nor reversed. And a circuit split lives on. The removal power question is likely headed back to the Supreme Court before long. This Essay examines a key premise of the Jarkesy litigation and its leading precedent, the 2010 case Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Co. Accounting Oversight Board. In both cases, the parties …

A Loss For Public Participation, Jeffrey Lubbers

Popular Media

Overshadowed in the blitzkrieg of orders and actions of the Trump Administration that are seemingly intended to assert complete presidential control over the executive branch was a recent rule issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) on March 3, 2025, signed by new Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

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 …

The Case For Contingent Regulatory Sunsets, Jeffrey D. Manns

Indiana Law Journal

Cost-benefit analysis is at the core of regulatory impact analysis for every proposed rule or regulation and is designed to be a structural constraint on the administrative state. The challenge is ex ante cost-benefit analysis necessarily rests on many assumptions, and much more information is available about a regulation’s impact after it has been implemented. But ex post cost-benefit analysis is ad hoc and infrequent in spite of efforts by numerous presidential administrations to promote regulatory lookbacks.

I propose institutionalizing “contingent regulatory sunsets” to ensure that rules and regulations have the positive impact in practice that administrative agencies intended. I …

"Then What?": A Framework For Life Without Chevron, Gary Lawson

UF Law Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court overruled Chevron in Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Dep’t of Commerce. What happens next? What should happen next?

This essay does not try to answer either of those important questions. Rather, it seeks to provide a framework to promote careful thinking about those questions. Specifically, any predictive or prescriptive account of the law governing judicial review of federal agency legal interpretations needs to think carefully about four issues.

First, what does “deference” actually mean in any given context? “Deference” can mean anything from polite respect to absolute obeisance, and everything in …

Streamlining Wildlife Regulation, Robert L. Fischman

Articles by Maurer Faculty

A recent burst of revisions in the bedrock regulations governing projects that may adversely affect wildlife represents a generational shift in policy. Streamlining federal decision -making drove much of this reform. Streamlining offers a path to address climate change without abandoning a longstanding commitment to wildlife conservation. The conservation community recognizes the need to build new infrastructure to reduce the rate of climate change through air emissions. The most urgent priority is decarbonizing the electrical ~rid through renewable energy generation and a better transmission network. Adaptation to the "new abnormal" of climate-driven environmental disruption demands federal approvals for a host …

The Interchangeable-Part Structure Of Food And Drug Law, Adam I. Muchmore

FIU Law Review

This Article demonstrates that nested tiers of interchangeable parts serve as the foundation for the regulatory programs administered by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Core interchangeable parts used in FDA-administered programs include product categories, prohibitions on adulteration and misbranding, agency-registration requirements, current good manufacturing practices, product standards, marketing authorization requirements, postmarket requirements, and user fees. In each of these areas, Congress or the FDA has engaged in interchangeable-part lawmaking (IPL). IPL occurs when a government takes a portion of its law in one subject area and uses it as a model for its own law in another subject area. …

Healthcare Ai's Unlearned Intermediaries, Charlotte A. Tschider

Faculty Publications & Other Works

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (“FDA”), as the largest and one of the most influential federal agencies, plays a significant role informing downstream tort actions, such as product liability claims against medical product manufacturers.  The contours of the relationship between regulatory behavior and tort law are allocated according to congressional act and through judicial interpretation of agency action.  While artificially intelligent medical devices are technically regulated by the FDA, FDA regulatory approaches may not meaningfully reduce the probability of patient injury.  When, despite inadequate ex ante processes, injured plaintiffs cannot recover in tort due to court perceptions of regulatory …

The Ill-Fated History Of Animal Protection Laws: Why Congress Must Create An Animal Protection Agency, Melissa Baines

Animal Law Review

Over the years, the United States Congress has passed several federal laws with the intention of protecting animals from being subjected to inhumane treatment by humans. Such laws have great potential to create positive change for animals, but all of these laws have been delegated to inappropriate government agencies for oversight and enforcement. It is time to finally remove the impossible task placed upon these federal agencies—who have been asked to carry out their own stated mandates while also promulgating rules that effectuate animal protection laws in conflict with those same mandates—by creating a federal Animal Protection Agency with the …

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

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

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 …

Emergency Oversight, Catherine Baylin Duryea

Faculty Publications

This Article examines one of the most pressing questions in administrative law: How much judicial oversight should administrative agencies face during an emergency? This issue was particularly salient during the COVID epidemic, but it is not new. The Second World War saw a significant expansion and consolidation of the power of administrative agencies as well as experimentation with the appropriate oversight role for courts. This Article analyzes one such experiment: judicial oversight of agencies implementing wartime anti-inflationary measures, i.e., price controls and rationing. During the war, Congress created a specialized court, the Emergency Court of Appeals (ECA), to hear disputes …

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 …

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 …

Tribute To Sally Katzen, Rachel Rothschild

Articles

I have been excitedly waiting for the opportunity to speak to you all about Sally tonight. I don't think you could find anyone more deserving of this award than she is. You have heard this evening about her extraordinary professional accomplishments and the indelible mark she has made on administrative law over the course of her career. But in addition to her achievements in government service and private practice, Sally will leave a lasting and significant legacy through the students that she taught at NYU. I hope I can do justice to the enormous role she has played in my …

Unwritten Administrative Law And The Regulatory Last Mile, Anthony B. Derron

Publications

Programs like the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act are ostensibly federal. But once they change hands from national to subnational, they’re implemented through state statutes and regulations, not direct enforcement of the United States Code. As a result, state, not federal, administrative law governs in many bread-and-butter situations. Through a comprehensive fifty-state survey, I find that this body of law is largely unwritten.

Yet cooperative federalism relies on the capacity of state institutions to function. And equally critical is the existence of law that shepherds a program from congressional subcommittee to the very …

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 …

Using Public Nuisance Litigation To Address Industrywide Misconduct: Common-Law Statutes, Nondelegation, And Regulation, Hillel Y. Levin, Timothy D. Lytton

Scholarly Works

In this Article, we assert that broad, open-ended public nuisance statutes offer a legitimate legal tool to curb public health harms caused by the unreasonable design, marketing, and distribution practices of product manufacturers. We argue that these statutes are "common-law statutes" by which legislatures authorize courts to apply the concept of public nuisance to new situations using common-law-style reasoning. We demonstrate that this understanding of public nuisance statutes is consistent with well-established interpretive traditions regarding the codification of common law. Statutory delegation of broad interpretive discretion to courts concerning the application of public nuisance law constitutes a legislative choice to …

Administrative Law's Unavailing Duties, Daniel Z. Epstein

Texas A&M Law Review

Through a novel empirical approach, this Article shows that legal doctrine does not determine whether federal courts provide remedies when agencies fail to enforce a statutory duty. Plaintiffs are most likely to succeed against the government when litigating statutory procedures located within agency-specific statutes and which raise major policy questions in immigration, healthcare, Native American rights, public housing, the environment, or labor. Others are more likely to lose against the government: plaintiffs litigating statutory violations involving procedures not specific to an agency, but which apply to officers and agencies throughout the bureaucracy. These cases involve duties governing ethics, transparency, recordkeeping, …

Legal Summaries Of Administrative Law Cases, Kimberly M. Papadantonakis

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

No abstract provided.

Federal Agency Nonacquiescence: Defining And Enforcing Constitutional Limitations On Bad Faith Agency Adjudication, Christopher C. Taintor

Maine Law Review

A leading authority in the field of administrative law has posited that "[t]he availability of judicial review is the necessary condition, psychologically if not logically, of a system of administrative power which purports to be legitimate, or legally valid." There is no question that judicial review is an imperfect check on agency action: it is susceptible to criticism for, on the one hand, the excessive limitations on its exercise, and on the other for the arguably inferior level of understanding from which courts must approach matters uniquely within the competence of particular administrators. Nonetheless, the courts remain "the acknowledged architects …

Violence In The Administrative State, Emily R. Chertoff

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

Drawing on an original, interview-based case study of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and a synthesis of six decades of social science literature, this Article offers a theory of physical violence in the administrative state that challenges foundational assumptions about administrative law. Approximately one-fifth of federal employees work for administrative agencies that police, fight wars, enforce immigration law, or incarcerate people—in other words, agencies that use force to execute the laws. These agencies are saturated with administrative law that obligates front-line administrators to confer due process, give notice, behave non-arbitrarily, and comply with law. Yet this law often fails to …

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 …