Administrative Law Commons^™

Procedural Guarantees For Disciplining Federal Employees, Khalifa Abdullah Al Mulla

Thesis/ Dissertation Defenses

Procedural disciplinary guarantees aim to protect public or federal employees from being penalized for violations without following specific procedures. Such violations could invalidate or taint administrative decisions. This thesis aims to ensure public employees are protected from penalties through legislation and legal texts that achieve this objective. In the United Arab Emirates, regulatory legislation exists that aims to establish effective procedural guarantees for employee discipline, whether through local legislation or other means. The study addressed the procedural safeguards for disciplinary investigations, which are essential at the outset of the investigation process. These safeguards allow the competent disciplinary authorities to initiate …

Administering Election Disputes, Rebecca Green

University of Miami Law Review

U.S. election administration has become supercharged with controversy. A process that should be mundane—casting and counting votes—has become the target of relentless litigation, much of which ends in non-merits rulings that risk perpetuating rather than resolving public concerns. The high volume of election litigation is costly, strains election officials, and risks eroding public trust in both elections and the courts. Recognizing the need to resolve election claims fairly and efficiently, Administering Election Disputes examines administrative remedies as an under-theorized alternative to judicial resolution. Increased use of well-designed administrative election dispute resolution (AEDR) could reduce pressure on courts, deliver faster and …

Reconstituting A Constitution, And A Republic: The Architecture Of Authoritarian Rule, J. Maria Glover

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

A constitution can be remade without tearing it down, or even changing a single word. It is done by law.

“The judicial power is vested in one Supreme Court and in such inferior courts as Congress may establish,” whose “province and duty” it is to “say what the law is.” U.S. Const. Art. III §1; Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 (Cranch) 137 (1803). It is not the power to remake the Constitution that grants it.

The Supreme Court is turning the inherited powers that hold power to law into instruments of its own aggrandizement. It is taking authority from …

The Crisis Of Appropriations Law, Samuel R. Bagenstos

Articles

Appropriations law is a unique body of federal law.  Appropriations law imposes its own somewhat baroque set of statutory interpretation principles, approves of very broad delegations to the Executive Branch without meaningful limiting principles, and is often exempt from judicial review.  But perhaps that is all about to change.  Donald Trump’s historically aggressive challenge to Congress’s power of the purse has spurred an unusually large volume of exceptionally high-stakes appropriations law litigation. 

The potential implications go beyond the high-profile issues such as enforcement of the Impoundment Control Act.  In general, the unusual features of appropriations law are built on a …

U.S. Administrative Law: A Casebook (6th Ed.), Jud Mathews

Faculty Scholarship

The number of administrative law texts is vast. The approach of this one, now in its fifth edition, is simple. It is: (1) to focus on the richest and most canonical cases; (2) to provide more extensive extracts of them than most casebooks; and (3) to keep the notes to a bare minimum. Updated through October 2025, the book contains a number of significant decisions from recent Supreme Court terms, as well as foundational classics that many contemporary casebooks cut, and much in between.

Rule 80b And Nonstatutory Judicial Review Of Administrative Action In Maine, Richard A. Langley

Maine Law Review

The 1967 amendments to rules 80B and 81 of the Maine Rules of Civil Procedure (MRCP) constitute significant and potentially far-reaching changes in judicial review of administrative action in Maine. Prior to 1959, nonstatutory judicial review of administrative action in Maine was available only by extraordinary writ. An alternate means of securing judicial review was provided by the original rule 80B of the MRCP adopted in 1959, but because of an apparent overlap of those two procedures, 80B was amended in 1967. That amendment made rule 80B the sole means of obtaining nonstatutory review of all governmental action and a …

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 …

Defining Deference: Impacts Of Abandoning Chevron On Emerging Technology Governance And Administrative Law, R. Aubrey Davis Iii

Seattle University Law Review

Emerging technologies, particularly Artificial Intelligence (AI), often lead to unforeseen legal outcomes. Notable abuses in areas such as facial recognition, employment bias, and housing discrimination are well known. However, legislative responses to these issues either have been largely reactive or there has been no legislative response at all. In lieu of legislation, agencies have sought to fill the gap. For example, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently proposed a rule mandating voter notification for all AI-generated political phone calls citing the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) of 1991 as authority. However, the TCPA was originally passed to curtail telemarketing, not …

Whither Leviathan? The Seepage Of Constitutional Law Into Public-Private Arbitration In The United States, Peter B. Rutledge

Scholarly Works

The chapter analyses how constitutional law influences private-public arbitration in the United States. Its central thesis is that constitutional law exerts a powerful indirect influence on arbitration law. While the US Constitution does not directly regulate arbitration, its underlying norms—such as separation of powers, federalism, and individual rights—impact arbitration law indirectly. The chapter explores the ways in which these constitutional principles influence public-private arbitration through statutory interpretation, treaty design, and private protocols reflecting constitutional norms. This pattern of influence manifests itself in public arbitration (i.e. arbitration involving states or state-owned entities) just as it does in private arbitration. Highlighting how …

The "Best Location" Standard And Puc Review Of Proposed Transmission Line Routes: In Re Bangor Hydro-Electric, Maine Law Review

Maine Law Review

Forty-five years after the enactment of legislation delegating eminent domain authority to electric power companies, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court had its first opportunity in In re Bangor Hydro-Electric Co. to construe the statute's grant of review authority to the Public Utilities Commission (PUC). Rejecting the "arbitrary and capricious" review standard previously applied by the PUC, the court held that the statute required the Commission to determine whether the utility's chosen location "best serves the public interest." Under the former standard, the utility had been required to present only minimal evidence in support of its choice of location in order …

Constraining The Executive Branch: Delegation, Agency Independence, And Congressional Design Of Judicial Review, Jennifer L. Selin, Pamela J. Clouser Mccann

Northwestern University Law Review

While scholarship examining the relationship between Congress, federal agencies, and the judiciary reveals variation in the statutory details that affects administrative and judicial decision-making, few studies explore the extent to which congressional delegation decisions balance both the substantive and procedural independence of agencies against the possibility of the federal judiciary’s review of administrative action.

This Article enhances scholarly understanding of delegation by providing a qualitative, theoretical, and empirical account of the circumstances under which Congress manipulates federal agency exposure to the federal judiciary. Ironically, combined with statutory provisions dictating agency independence, increasing an agency’s exposure to unelected federal judges can …

The Solicitor General, Consistency, And Credibility, Margaret H. Lemos, Deborah A. Widiss

Faculty Scholarship

This Article offers the first comprehensive look at cases in which the Solicitor General (SG) rejects a legal argument offered on behalf of the United States in prior litigation. Such reversals have received considerable attention in recent years, as shifts in presidential administrations have produced multiple high-profile “flip-flops”—as the Justices sometimes call them—by the SG. Even those observers who defend the SG, including veterans of the office, caution that inconsistency in legal argument poses a threat to the SG’s credibility with the Court. Our goal is to better understand the circumstances that lead the SG to change its position on …

"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 …

Medical Review Officers And The Limits Of Judicial Review, Leonard C. Brahin

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

In the public imagination, defenders of our national security wear military garb. But the individuals who determine their fitness-for-duty wear white coats. The unenviable task of assessing those who make up our national security workforce is carried out by a group of independent physicians who must make nuanced determinations about illicit drug and alcohol use by government employees. In addition to testing roles that may seem unexciting, like accountants and auditors, medical review officers (MROs) are tasked with ensuring employees of nuclear power plants and commercial drivers are fit for duty. In doing so, they rely on their experience, expertise, …

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 …

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 …

The New Frontier Of Guidance Reviewability, Tomás Rios

Michigan Law Review

In the administrative context, agency actions must be “final” to trigger judicial review. The Supreme Court’s opinions in Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. marked an important shift in finality doctrine by emphasizing that the calculus of whether agency guidance is “final” may turn on its practical effects. For decades, agency guidance rarely warranted judicial review because it is not legally binding and, thus, not final. But the advent of the Sackett-Hawkes pragmatic analysis has changed the landscape, raising particular concerns for agencies relying on promulgating guidance documents to “softly” regulate. This …

Brief Of Professors Of Administrative Law As Amici Curiae In Support Of Plaintiff-Appellant, Jeffrey Lubbers

Amicus Briefs & Court Filings

Amici are professors of law who teach and write in the field of administrative law. They have an interest in how this Court’s decision will affect administrative law, especially the judicial review of agency action. While individual amici’s views on judicial review of agency action may differ, all agree that the panel opinion’s denial of judicial review of the Federal Election Commission’s dismissal of complaints brought under the Federal Election Campaign Act, 52 U.S.C. § 30101 et seq., is incorrect.

Chevron's 51 Imperfect Solutions., Christopher J. Walker, Neena Menon

Articles

In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated the judicial deference federal agencies previously received for their statutory interpretations, overturning the Court’s landmark 1984 decision in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. While Chevron was never binding on state courts, where the balance of powers and state constitutions may require different or no deference to agencies, numerous states have adopted Chevron deference, Skidmore weight, or similar deference regimes for judicial review of agency legal interpretations. Despite these developments, little scholarly attention has been paid to how and why states have developed administrative law’s deference doctrines, how the …

The Ordinary Questions Doctrine, Lisa S. Bressman

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court overruled Chevron as inconsistent with the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA"), which requires courts to decide "all relevant questions of law" and therefore prohibits them from deferring to agency interpretations because the relevant statutory language is ambiguous. A different approach now governs judicial review of the countless routine, often specialized questions of statutory interpretation that agencies answer in the normal course of implementing their statutes-the "ordinary" questions. But Loper Bright did not provide direction on how courts should determine which of these questions are questions of law. This issue arises because many, …

Sidestepping Substance: How Administrative Law Plays An Outsized Role In Shaping Environmental Policy And Why Recalibration Is Necessary, Sanne H. Knudsen

Articles

Administrative law and environmental law are companion fields. Still, they are not interchangeable. They promote different values. And yet, sometimes when courts resolve environmental disputes by relying on administrative doctrines, courts elevate the values of administrative law over those codified in environmental statutes. This is particularly concerning when courts rely on judicially-created administrative law doctrines to sidestep congressional intent as expressed by the substantive aims of environmental statutes.

To reduce the risk of sidestepping—whether inadvertent or intentional—this Article critically examines how administrative law doctrines can undermine environmental law. Drawing on prominent case examples, including the Supreme Court decision in Sackett …

Agency Use Of Indirect Benefits To Justify Regulation, Abe Eichner

Michigan Law Review

Executive agencies have long used indirect benefits—meaning benefits beyond the express purpose of a regulation—to justify their rulemakings. However, the statutes that provide agencies with regulatory authority rarely explicitly direct agencies to consider indirect benefits. Lower courts disagree over whether consideration of indirect benefits is permissible, and the Supreme Court has reserved the question for a future case. Courts and existing scholarship have largely asked whether particular statutory provisions authorize consideration of indirect benefits. This Note contends that, even without such statutory authorization, indirect benefits are presumptively permissible because they further three traditional administrative law values: rational decisionmaking, transparency, and …

Barring Judicial Review, Laura E. Dolbow

Vanderbilt Law Review

Whether judicial review is available is one of the most hotly contested issues in administrative law. Recently, laws that prohibit judicial review have sparked debate in the Medicare, immigration, and patent contexts. These debates are continuing in challenges to the recently created Medicare price negotiation program. Yet despite debates about the removal of judicial review, little is known about how often, and in what contexts, Congress has expressly precluded review. This Article provides new insights about express preclusion by conducting an empirical study of the U.S. Code. It creates an original dataset of laws that expressly preclude judicial review of …

Re-Examining Judicial Review Of Delegated Legislation, Kenny Chng

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

The usage of delegated legislation as a means of governance deserves significant attention, in view of the enormous impact that it is capable of having on the lives of citizens. While reforms to the process of parliamentary scrutiny are an important means of minimising the inappropriate usage of delegated legislation, this paper explores the possibility of drawing more fruitfully upon judicial review as an additional control mechanism. It undertakes a theoretical analysis of what makes delegated legislation distinct from primary legislation and other types of executive action for the purposes of judicial review, with a view towards identifying the proper …

The D.C. Circuit As A Conseil D'Etat, Andrew Hammond

Articles by Maurer Faculty

A storm is brewing in American administrative law. More and more federal judges, including a majority of the Justices of the Supreme Court, openly question longstanding doctrine. A throng of academics profess skepticism of the same. This formalist turn among judges, lawyers, and academics challenges the very legitimacy of the administrative state. But what does this tempest portend for the D.C. Circuit?

The D.C. Circuit is often described as the nation’s second highest court, but its precise role in the federal judiciary is only fifty years old. As a member of that appellate court, now-Chief Justice John Roberts once admitted …

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 …

"Major Questions" Malarkey: An Arbitrary And Capricious New Doctrine For Vetoing Controversial Agency Rules, Lars Noah

UF Law Faculty Publications

In 2022, in West Virginia v. EPA, the U.S. Supreme Court officially adopted the “major questions” doctrine. Commentators have already spilled plenty of ink trying to make sense of what this might portend, but so far seemingly everyone has accepted at face value the Court’s framing of the issue that it confronted in that case. This symposium contribution offers a slightly different perspective on the decision and suggests that closer attention to the precise nature of the question posed therein might reveal a distinctive flaw at the heart of the majority’s newfangled clear statement rule—it only sows confusion to …

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 …

Situating Structural Challenges To Agency Authority Within The Framework Of The Finality Principle, Harold J. Krent

Indiana Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Major Questions Impede Major Progress--Rebuking The Major Questions Doctrine & West Virginia V. Epa In Minnesota, Michael Warkel

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.