Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
-
- Constitutional Law (121)
- Environmental Law (24)
- Jurisprudence (21)
- Law and Society (19)
- Criminal Law (18)
-
- Legal History (17)
- Courts (16)
- State and Local Government Law (16)
- Civil Rights and Discrimination (15)
- Judges (15)
- Legislation (15)
- Law and Economics (13)
- Supreme Court of the United States (13)
- Immigration Law (12)
- Land Use Law (12)
- Law and Politics (12)
- Litigation (12)
- Natural Resources Law (12)
- President/Executive Department (12)
- Social and Behavioral Sciences (12)
- Health Law and Policy (11)
- Property Law and Real Estate (11)
- Criminal Procedure (10)
- Economics (9)
- Communications Law (8)
- Comparative and Foreign Law (8)
- Consumer Protection Law (8)
- Public Law and Legal Theory (8)
- Institution
-
- BLR (40)
- Villanova University Charles Widger School of Law (23)
- William & Mary Law School (10)
- Yeshiva University, Cardozo School of Law (5)
- Pepperdine University (4)
-
- Washington and Lee University School of Law (4)
- Boston University School of Law (3)
- Georgetown University Law Center (3)
- The Catholic University of America, Columbus School of Law (3)
- University of Georgia School of Law (3)
- American University Washington College of Law (2)
- Barry University School of Law (2)
- Maurer School of Law: Indiana University (2)
- Seattle University School of Law (2)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (2)
- University of Missouri-Kansas City School of Law (2)
- University of Washington School of Law (2)
- Belmont University (1)
- Columbia Law School (1)
- Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (1)
- Loyola University Chicago, School of Law (1)
- Northwestern Pritzker School of Law (1)
- Notre Dame Law School (1)
- Osgoode Hall Law School of York University (1)
- Schulich School of Law, Dalhousie University (1)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (1)
- University of Miami Law School (1)
- University of South Carolina (1)
- University of Tennessee College of Law (1)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (1)
- Publication Year
- Publication
-
- ExpressO (38)
- Villanova Law Review (1956 - ) (21)
- Faculty Scholarship (7)
- Articles (5)
- Faculty Publications (5)
-
- Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works (3)
- Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (3)
- Scholarly Works (3)
- Supreme Court Case Files (3)
- William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal (3)
- Catholic University Law Review (2)
- Faculty Works (2)
- Rutgers Law School (Newark) Faculty Papers (2)
- Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals (2)
- Seattle University Law Review (2)
- Washington Law Review (2)
- Working Paper Series (2)
- All Papers (1)
- Articles, Book Chapters, & Popular Press (1)
- Barry Law Review (1)
- Belmont Law Review (1)
- Cardozo Law Review (1)
- Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology (1)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (1)
- Faculty Publications & Other Works (1)
- Georgia Law Review (1)
- Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies (1)
- Indiana Law Journal (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- NULR Online (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 30 of 126
Full-Text Articles in Administrative Law
Presidential Noncompliance And Judicial Response: A Two-Branch Dialectic, Seth Waxman
Presidential Noncompliance And Judicial Response: A Two-Branch Dialectic, Seth Waxman
Washington Law Review
No abstract provided.
Presidents, Opinions, And Independent Officers, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
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 …
Getting Our House In Order: Mapping The Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine Onto Washington’S Inclusionary Zoning Policies After Sheetz V. County Of El Dorado, John “Jack” Haskins
Getting Our House In Order: Mapping The Unconstitutional Conditions Doctrine Onto Washington’S Inclusionary Zoning Policies After Sheetz V. County Of El Dorado, John “Jack” Haskins
Washington Law Review
The unconstitutional conditions doctrine dictates what a government can and cannot do when exercising its police powers to promote community interests. Recent Supreme Court jurisprudence highlights a special application of the doctrine in the land use context, with Sheetz v. County of El Dorado recognizing constitutional scrutiny of legislative decisions. After decades of using its own analysis, Washington courts now use the federal approach in these cases. Land use exists at the forefront of Washington policies and the state maintains a sharp focus on the affordable housing crisis. One approach enacted at the local and state level is mandatory inclusionary …
What Is The Distribution Of National Historical Parks?, Randall K. Johnson
What Is The Distribution Of National Historical Parks?, Randall K. Johnson
Faculty Works
In an increasingly polarized nation, which no longer can reach any consensus about what is meant by the term “common good,” it might be wise to extend additional protections to national monuments from executive branch interference. But prior to doing so, the U.S. Congress may want to undertake some additional research work. Such research could build on the existing charge of the National Park Service as well as other interested parties. By doing so, Congress gains insight into whether and how this federal legislature should expand protections for national historical parks.
My article explains, at least in part, how Congress …
A Historical Case For A Robust But Non-Remedial Seventh Amendment, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
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:
- 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 Final Frontier Of Federal Power: Understanding, Defining, And Enforcing “Necessary And Proper” To Enhance The General Welfare And Limit Federal Power, Thomas Ralph
Catholic University Law Review
This comment explores the long and inconsistent history of the Necessary and Proper Clause and its unique role as both a grant of power to Congress and a limit on the outer reach of the federal government. The federal government is in theory one of limited powers; however, this promise of the Constitution cannot be truly recognized without developing a robust framework for applying the Necessary and Proper Clause as a reliable source of federal power. After establishing the need for a framework, this comment provides five judicial decision rules that can be applied by trial and appellate courts to …
James Baldwin And What U.S. Governments Owe Every American, Randall K. Johnson
James Baldwin And What U.S. Governments Owe Every American, Randall K. Johnson
Faculty Works
This book review looks at the life, work and impact of James Baldwin, a famous writer and civil rights activist that was born one hundred (100) years ago. It does so, for one of the first times in the field of law, by examining Baldwin’s influence on the legal system. The book review carries out its work by identifying Baldwin’s impacts upon U.S. law: before, during and after his public service career. In the process, this book review describes how governments can build on Baldwin's writings and advocacy work.
Amicus In Wilcox V. Trump On Presidential Removal And Unitary Executive Theorists’ Errors, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
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 …
The Immigration Subpoena Power, Lindsay Nash
The Immigration Subpoena Power, Lindsay Nash
Articles
For over a century, the federal government has wielded the immigration subpoena power in darkness, forcing private individuals, subfederal governments, and others to help it detain and deport. This vast administrative power has remained opaque even to those who receive these subpoenas and invisible to those it affects most. Indeed, the very people targeted by these subpoenas often don’t know they exist, much less how they facilitate arrest and deportation. For these reasons—and more—this power has escaped the legal battles raging over other immigration enforcement tactics and the scrutiny of journalists, scholars, and courts. Thus, as state- and locality-held information …
A Major Question For Administrative Law: How Are Courts Applying The Major Questions Doctrine Post West Virginia V. Epa?, Christopher Eckhardt
A Major Question For Administrative Law: How Are Courts Applying The Major Questions Doctrine Post West Virginia V. Epa?, Christopher Eckhardt
Catholic University Law Review
On June 30, 2022, judicial deference toward actions of administrative agencies took a significant hit. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court formally recognized—for the first time—the major questions doctrine, which requires agencies to identify clear congressional authorization when claiming the authority to make decisions of vast economic and political significance. Since June 30, 2022, the Supreme Court has utilized the major questions doctrine in decisions of national importance, including topics ranging from environmental protection efforts to cancelling student debt. This note offers a snapshot of how the major questions doctrine has been applied by federal courts across the country …
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Judicial Fidelity, Caprice L. Roberts
Pepperdine Law Review
Judicial critics abound. Some say the rule of law is dead across all three branches of government. Four are dead if you count the media as the fourth estate. All are in trouble, even if one approves of each branch’s headlines, but none of them are dead. Not yet. Pundits and scholars see the latest term of the Supreme Court as clear evidence of partisan politics and unbridled power. They decry an upheaval of laws and norms demonstrating the dire situation across the federal judiciary. Democracy is not dead even when the Court issues opinions that overturn precedent, upends long-standing …
Judicial Review In Public And Private Governance, Tomer S. Stein
Judicial Review In Public And Private Governance, Tomer S. Stein
Scholarly Works
In Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, the Supreme Court limited judicial deference to universities. In West Virginia v. EPA, the Court reduced deference to administrative agencies. In Coster v. UIP Cos., Inc., the Delaware Supreme Court narrowed deference to boards of directors, proclaimed a new standard of judicial review, and then seemingly retracted it. Common to these constitutional, administrative, and corporate law cases is unpredictability, uncertainty, and incoherence in the use and application of substantive standards of review. The resulting disarray is explicitly acknowledged by the very judges that formulate these standards of …
Loper Bright In A Larger Interpretive Perspective: Is This Justice Scalia’S Court Anymore?, Victoria Frances Nourse
Loper Bright In A Larger Interpretive Perspective: Is This Justice Scalia’S Court Anymore?, Victoria Frances Nourse
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo has left administrative lawyers agog: Could the Supreme Court really reverse the “goliath” known as Chevron deference? For those who study the Court’s interpretive landscape more broadly, however, Chevron reversal may not be as unexpected as administrative lawyers believe. This Article will look at Loper Bright by linking three notable interpretive developments: the major questions doctrine, Chevron skepticism, and strict constructions of statutory text. These developments share the same risk: the Court is imposing a new “clarity tax” on both Congress and administrative agencies. Having said this, others’ grave worries about changes in Chevron are …
American Star Chamber: Online Misinformation, Government Intervention, And The Intellectual Matrix Of The First Amendment, Emily E. Burton
American Star Chamber: Online Misinformation, Government Intervention, And The Intellectual Matrix Of The First Amendment, Emily E. Burton
Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology
Just as monarchs and clerical authorities struggled to respond to seditious and heretical writings enabled by the invention of the printing press, twenty-first century governments are experiencing a similar information revolution as a result of the digital age and a rising tide of what the United States has labeled online misinformation. Like the printing press, the Internet has enabled the spread of information at an exponentially lower cost and an exponentially higher speed as it extends the ability to publish thoughts and opinions to an increasingly diverse array of individuals. Although this was largely celebrated during the first two decades …
The Lawlessness Of Sackett V. Epa, William W. Buzbee
The Lawlessness Of Sackett V. Epa, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
When the Supreme Court speaks on a disputed statutory interpretation question, its words and edicts undoubtedly are the final judicial word, binding lower courts and the executive branch. Its majority opinions are the law. But the Court’s opinions can nonetheless be assessed for how well they hew to fundamental elements of respect for the rule of law. In particular, law-respecting versus law-neglecting or lawless judicial work by the Court can be assessed in the statutory interpretation, regulatory, and separation of power realms against the following key criteria, which in turn are based on some basic rule of law tenets: analysis …
Mother Of Exiles: Hospitality & Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Ana M. Rodriguez
Mother Of Exiles: Hospitality & Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Ana M. Rodriguez
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
This article examines the historical pattern of denying immigration in the U.S. on moral and supposedly Christian grounds. Although it is reasonable that no nation is duty-bound to welcome every foreigner and provide the same benefits afforded those with full citizenship, this article contends that a genuinely Christian response demands the biblical core value of hospitality to others. Indeed, xenophobia is the antithesis of hospitality and cannot be supported by a faithful, exegetical interpretation of the Christian Bible. It should be noted that this article does not propose the emergence of an American theocracy; however, hospitality-based dialogue and humanitarian principles …
The Immigration Court System: Unconstitutionality At The Hands Of The Executive To Push Nativism, Chloe Wigul
The Immigration Court System: Unconstitutionality At The Hands Of The Executive To Push Nativism, Chloe Wigul
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
The United States’ immigration court system is located within the U.S. Department of Justice’s Executive Office for Immigration Review and operated under the power of the attorney general. Consequently, the attorney general can review and overrule decisions made by the Board of Immigration Appeals, the immigration appellate body. If the attorney general uses this authority, his decision cannot be reconsidered, and his opinion becomes precedent. Immigration courts are unique in that no other court system is located within or controlled by the executive branch. Focusing on key historical eras, this Comment compares the development of immigration law and policy with …
Harm Egalitarianism, Michael E. Herz
Harm Egalitarianism, Michael E. Herz
Articles
In the last few years, law schools and law professors have given new attention to how questions of race can be interwoven into courses that are not explicitly about race. Much has been written about how to do so in both first-year and upper-level courses, and, from all reports, the law school classroom has meaningfully changed. My sense, though it is completely impressionistic and unscientific, is that the typical Administrative Law course may have changed less than many others. It seems fair to say, at least, that there has not developed a standard suite of topics that a professor wanting …
The Due Process Owed To Noncitizens: Standardizing The Burden In Sec. 1226(A) Bond Hearings With The Help Of Hernandez-Lara And Velasco Lopez, Sharon Shaji
Cardozo Law Review
No abstract provided.
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Jazz Improvisation And The Law: Constrained Choice, Sequence, And Strategic Movement Within Rules, William W. Buzbee
Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works
This Article argues that a richer understanding of the nature of law is possible through comparative, analogical examination of legal work and the art of jazz improvisation. This exploration illuminates a middle ground between rule of law aspirations emphasizing stability and determinate meanings and contrasting claims that the untenable alternative is pervasive discretionary or politicized law. In both the law and jazz improvisation settings, the work involves constraining rules, others’ unpredictable actions, and strategic choosing with attention to where a collective creation is going. One expects change and creativity in improvisation, but the many analogous characteristics of law illuminate why …
Artificial Intelligence In Government: Risks And Challenges Of Algorithmic Governance In The Administrative State, Jose Vida Fernandez
Artificial Intelligence In Government: Risks And Challenges Of Algorithmic Governance In The Administrative State, Jose Vida Fernandez
Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies
This article analyzes the legal implications of using artificial intelligence in government and how it is challenging the foundations of the administrative state. It begins by demonstrating that a new model of government is emerging, based on information and intelligence (i-Gov). To understand the nature and scope of this new i-Gov model, this article will explain what artificial intelligence really is and analyze the applications that are currently being carried out in the US and the EU. Next, it will review the regulatory framework that is emerging that regulates government use of artificial intelligence in both the US and the …
Nfib V. Osha: A Unified Separation Of Powers Doctrine And Chevron's No Show, Randolph J. May, Andrew K. Magloughlin
Nfib V. Osha: A Unified Separation Of Powers Doctrine And Chevron's No Show, Randolph J. May, Andrew K. Magloughlin
South Carolina Law Review
No abstract provided.
Defending The Defenders: Why Bureaucratic Independence Is A Necessary Supplement To Judicial Defense Of Democracy The Specter Of Dictatorship: Judicial Enabling Of Presidential Power, Andrea Scoseria Katz
Defending The Defenders: Why Bureaucratic Independence Is A Necessary Supplement To Judicial Defense Of Democracy The Specter Of Dictatorship: Judicial Enabling Of Presidential Power, Andrea Scoseria Katz
Scholarship@WashULaw
A familiar story is being observed in countries ranging from Brazil to Australia, the United States, and Poland, as elected executives deploy a populist threat narrative to politicize the rule of law and entrench themselves in power. Out of the academy, a growing literature on democratic “backsliding” or “decline” proposes a menu of “guardrails” for shoring up democracy from gradual collapse. Broadly, these guardrails fall under two headings: I call one judicial, the other bureaucratic. The former looks to the power of judicial review, under which courts may invalidate enactments that threaten, not just the Constitution, but the very democratic …
Transition Administration, Michael Herz, Katherine A. Shaw
Transition Administration, Michael Herz, Katherine A. Shaw
Articles
The period from November 3, 2020 to January 20, 2021, was unlike any presidential transition in our history. President Donald Trump refused to accept his ballot-box defeat, instead battling to overturn the election’s outcome. This dramatic public campaign was waged in state and federal courts, state legislatures, the offices of state and local election officials, the Department of Justice, and finally the halls of Congress, where on January 6, 2021, a mob incited by the President stormed the Capitol with the explicit goal of preventing the final counting of electoral votes for Joe Biden. These efforts had more mundane and …
The Lost History Of Delegation At The Founding, Christine Chabot
The Lost History Of Delegation At The Founding, Christine Chabot
Georgia Law Review
The new Supreme Court is poised to bring the administrative state to a grinding halt. Five Justices have endorsed Justice Gorsuch’s dissent in Gundy v. United States—an opinion that threatens to invalidate countless regulatory statutes in which Congress has delegated significant policymaking authority to the Executive Branch. Justice Gorsuch claimed that the “text and history” of the Constitution required the Court to replace a longstanding constitutional doctrine that permits broad delegations with a more restrictive one. But the supposedly originalist arguments advanced by Justice Gorsuch and like-minded scholars run counter to the understandings of delegation that prevailed in the Founding …
The Emerging Lessons Of Trump V. Hawaii, Shalini Bhargava Ray
The Emerging Lessons Of Trump V. Hawaii, Shalini Bhargava Ray
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
In the years since the Supreme Court decided Trump v. Hawaii, federal district courts have adjudicated dozens of rights-based challenges to executive action in immigration law. Plaintiffs, including U.S. citizens, civil rights organizations, and immigrants themselves, have alleged violations of the First Amendment and the equal protection component of the Due Process Clause with some regularity based on President Trump’s animus toward immigrants. This Article assesses Hawaii’s impact on these challenges to immigration policy, and it offers two observations. First, Hawaii has amplified federal courts’ practice of privileging administrative law claims over constitutional ones. For example, courts considering …
Who Constrains Presidential Exercise Of Delegated Powers?, Rebecca L. Brown
Who Constrains Presidential Exercise Of Delegated Powers?, Rebecca L. Brown
William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Building on the work of administrative law scholars who have identified and illuminated the several components of the problem over the years, this Article will seek to show what has happened when a cluster of separate circumstances have come together to create a new and serious threat to individual liberty when the President exercises expansive delegated authority. Several doctrinal components lead to this confluence: First, the moribund “intelligible principle” test has evolved to provide little or no constraint on this or any other delegation. Second, a delegation to the President, specifically, is not subject to the procedural requirements of the …
Constitutional Limits On Administrative Agencies In Cyberspace, Jon M. Garon
Constitutional Limits On Administrative Agencies In Cyberspace, Jon M. Garon
Belmont Law Review
No abstract provided.
The Constitutional Status Of The Administrative State, Kate Glover Berger
The Constitutional Status Of The Administrative State, Kate Glover Berger
All Papers
This paper considers the constitutional status of the administrative state. It argues that, after decades of growth in size, reach, and power, the administrative state can now be understood as an architectural feature of the Canadian constitution. To make this argument, the paper first provides an account of the concept of architecture in Canadian constitutional law and the analytical framework it offers for thinking through the status question. It then looks to developments in Canadian public law that shed light on the status of the administrative state. The analysis focuses on three such developments: the expansion of the role of …