Administrative Law Commons^™

Trump V. Cook And The American Rule Of For-Cause Removal, Jane Manners, Lev Menand

Faculty Scholarship

Halfway through oral argument in Trump v. Cook, Justice Amy Coney Barrett asked Solicitor General John Sauer when a statute authorizing an officer’s removal should be read to require process. “Why shouldn’t we do the same thing that the Shurtleff court did,” Barrett asked, “and say that, well, as we said in Shurtleff, when a statute specifies the grounds for removal, there must be notice and a hearing given?”

In response, Sauer distinguished between statutes authorizing removal for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office (INM) — which he conceded require process — and statutes using the more …

The Undue Degradation Of "Undue Degradation": How Loper Bright Threatens To Weaken Environmental Protections For Domestic Lithium Operations, Griffin M. Krawitz

William & Mary Law Review

On October 24, 2024, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) approved the Rhyolite Ridge Lithium-Boron Project, a seven-thousand- acre mining operation in the middle of the Nevada desert. Denoted as the “first domestic lithium project to get full regulatory approval under the Biden Administration,” the new mine is projected to supply enough batteries to power roughly 370,000 electric vehicles (EVs) every year for the next twenty-three years. Despite concern that the mine parallels and threatens the habitat for the Tiehm’s buckwheat (the only known habitat containing the critically endangered and culturally significant flower), the BLM has been adamant that its …

Tracing The Truth: Strengthening U.S. Food Traceability With Lessons From The Eur. Union, Carolina Gomez

University of Miami Business Law Review

The United States (U.S.) has made significant progress in improving food traceability, with the FDA’s Final Food Traceability Rule set to take effect in 2026. This long-overdue regulation aims to improve outbreak response and better protect public health. However, major gaps in the U.S. traceability system remain, leaving consumers exposed to preventable foodborne illness outbreaks. Legislative challenges, including H.R. Bill 7563 and provisions in the Fiscal Year 2025 Agriculture Appropriations bill, threaten to delay or weaken these necessary reforms. Compounding these challenges, on August 7, 2025, the FDA proposed extending the compliance deadline for the rule by 30 months, to …

Reliance, Misplaced: Restoring The Text Of The Antifraud Provisions Of The Federal Securities Laws In Sec Enforcement Actions, Christopher R. Mills

University of Miami Business Law Review

The antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws are statutory sledgehammers. Those who violate them can face severe sanctions, including ruinous monetary penalties and others that can effectively bar firms and individuals from the securities industries. The Securities and Exchange Commission is authorized to enforce these provisions with the full weight of the federal government. And the SEC does so vigorously.

Even though the antifraud provisions target fraud, for decades lower courts and the Commission have held that the Commission can establish violations of them without any evidence that anyone was misled. They have done so by concluding that, unlike …

Adaptable Ai Apprentices: Law Practice Sidekicks, Henry H. Perritt, Jr.

University of Miami Law Review

Two case studies involving motorcycle-accident negligence and administrative law in the context of drone regulation violations explore the transformative potential of generative AI in legal practice. Four AI engines—DeepSeek, Claude, ChatGPT, and Grok—were asked to analyze transcripts of client interviews by identifying legal claims and assessing their strengths and weaknesses.

The results demonstrate that current AI technology effectively processes natural-language client interviews, identifies viable legal theories, and assesses claim strengths and weaknesses in both tort and administrative law contexts. The AI systems demonstrated proficiency in parsing legal theories and citing relevant statutes and administrative regulations, though case citations were frequently …

Brief For Amici Curiae Immigration Law Scholars In Support Of Petitioner-Appellee, Supporting Affirmance, Lindsay Nash

Amicus Briefs

Amicus curiae brief filed by immigration law scholars, including Cardozo School of Law Professor Lindsay Nash, in Herrera Avila v. Bondi. The brief examines the scope of mandatory immigration detention under the Immigration and Nationality Act and argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1225(b)(2)(A) applies to noncitizens seeking admission at the border rather than individuals apprehended within the interior of the United States.

Volume 14 Masthead

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Legal History: The Curious Case Of The Disappearing Unceded Lakota Territories, Sebastian F. Braun

American Indian Law Journal

This Article discusses whether the Lakota Nation still has title to the unceded territories outlined in the Treaty of 1868. While many accounts focus on the supposed diminishment of the Great Sioux Reservation, the question of the unceded lands has largely been forgotten. It has renewed relevance in the context of the Dakota Access Pipeline, which crosses the lands. From a broader perspective, the case raises questions about how history is understood, constructed, and selected in American Indian Law cases. Most legal cases, especially those concerning treaty rights, are rooted in an interpretation of history; if that history is misinterpreted …

Expansion Of Federal Benefits To Non-Native Adopted Children, Anna-Grace Hockensmith

American Indian Law Journal

There is palpable tension between tribal sovereignty and federal administrative control in the distribution of federal benefits to members of Tribal Nations. This tension is felt by adopted non-Native children who might struggle to receive federal benefits even though the tribe of their adopted parent(s) has accepted them as a member. This Note explores how adoption of a non-Native child by a tribal member intersects with tribal membership and whether that membership should be enough for the child to receive federal benefits.

The Note discusses four main topics, including: (1) tribal membership, adoption, and current federal enrollment criteria; (2) an …

Beyond Icwa: Within Family Court Systems, Mixed Indigenous Families Confront Ongoing Jurisdictional Violence, Nis Wilbur

American Indian Law Journal

Mixed Indigenous families (MIFs) navigating parental custody in the United States can find themselves trapped in a Battleship®-style jurisdictional maze, where tribal, state, and federal authorities collide unpredictably. This legal mess threatens to separate children from their tribal communities, undermines tribal sovereignty, and can force families into years of costly litigation. The problem is rooted in centuries of white supremacist law and policy that systematically dispossess tribes of culture and self-governance: from the Marshall Trilogy to the boarding school era and harmful adoption schemes. Today, legal frameworks like the UCCJEA remain insufficient as they minimize or ignore tribal civil jurisdiction, …

Table Of Contents

American Indian Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Workers’ Compensation Codes In American Indian* Tribal Nations, Autumn N. Siegel

American Indian Law Journal

This Article examines various Tribal Nations’ experiences in developing their own workers’ compensation systems using a comparative law and legal development approach, including direct interviews with a diverse range of tribal members. Tribal Nations’ self-created workers’ compensation codes predominantly rely on local models and expertise to establish and operate their systems. However, Tribal Nations also infuse their own cultural values into their codes, incorporating tribal perspectives and priorities such as valuing traditional medicine and peace-making alternative dispute resolution, providing more generously to volunteers, and incorporating return-to-work programs into their workers’ compensation systems. Some Tribal Nations also find it necessary to …

U.N.Masking American Exceptionalism: How International Frameworks Can Inform American Indian Policy, Kaitlin Reese

American Indian Law Journal

“U.N.masking American Exceptionalism: How International Frameworks Can Inform American Policy,” serves primarily to examine and criticize how American case law, such as Johnson v. M’Intosh, has been used in foreign courts to justify the Doctrine of Discovery and how, despite many other courts eventually acknowledging it as a harmful rule of law in meaningful ways, the United States has done no such thing. This Article walks through not only the legal cases both at home and abroad, but also delves into the historical background that led up to Johnson, examines the cases abroad that integrate the Doctrine of Discovery and …

The Tribal Rules Of Evidence, Nicole Morote

American Indian Law Journal

Rules of evidence shape litigation practice across the country. In this sense, they govern the truth as it enters the court. Legal scholarship has yet to study tribal approaches to evidence— an area with tremendous promise for legal practitioners and evidence rulemakers alike.

This Article is the first to do so. It analyzes an array of tribal evidence codes across the United States. It reveals three frameworks that describe tribes’ approaches to the Federal Rules. In doing so, it offers a modest contribution to the nascent intersection between Tribal law and evidence studies: crucial insight into tribal systems’ unique needs, …

Advancing The Rights Of Nature: Lessons From Sauk-Suiattle V. City Of Seattle, Harry S. Katz

American Indian Law Journal

Advocates for the “rights of nature” seek recognition of legal rights for natural elements such as mountains, rivers, and non-human species as a means of protecting the environment. In the United States, Tribal Nations have been at the forefront of this nascent movement. In a 2022 Washington state case, the Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe sued the City of Seattle, alleging that the City’s hydroelectric dams on the Skagit River infringe upon the rights of salmon. Those rights, they claim, include the salmon’s rights to exist, flourish, regenerate, and evolve. The case, known as Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe v. City of Seattle, …

Native History Is United States History: How United States History Censorship Leads To Passive Acceptance Of Racial Discrimination And Furthers The Decline Of Tribal Sovereignty, Nickolasa A. Jackson

American Indian Law Journal

Native stories are embedded in the United States Constitution, property law, and the nation’s legal and political framework, but education frequently omits these truths. Such erasure perpetuates misunderstanding, invisibility, and hostility toward Native communities, obscuring the reality that the United States was built through the dispossession, coercion, and suffering of Indigenous Peoples. Whitewashing history has allowed the nation to claim moral virtue and industriousness while denying the foundational role of Indigenous Peoples. The Article emphasizes that Native rights, whether land, water, or other treaty-protected entitlements, as well as inherent rights such as tribal sovereignty, are not charitable or discretionary; they …

Center For Biological Diversity V. U.S. Bureau Of Land Management, Erika C. Rader

Public Land & Resources Law Review

The Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt. marks the Ninth Circuit’s second time considering the Willow Project, which plans to drill oil in Alaska. Environmental plaintiffs brought a series of claims under NEPA, the Reserves Act, ANILCA, and the ESA to stop or stall the Project. Plaintiffs focused on the BLM’s use of a “full field development standard” in assessing alternatives to the Project. Despite the range of claims, the Ninth Circuit allowed the Project to move forward, but on remand required the BLM to explain its reasoning for departing from the full field development standard …

De Novo Review For Asylum At The Circuit Court Level: Comparing A Stringent Standard Of Review For Asylum Seekers In The U.S. To The European Court Of Human Rights’ Standard, Dani Gómez

Human Rights Brief

On March 14, 2022, an immigration judge (IJ) denied the asylum applications of Douglas Humberto Urias-Orellana, Sayra Iliana Gamez-Mejia, and their child, ordering them removed to El Salvador. Urias-Orellana and his family had been placed in removal proceedings with

the Executive Office of Immigration Review (EOIR) and filed applications for asylum.  At the individual merits hearing, the IJ ruled that the threats were “insufficiently menacing” to constitute persecution. The Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirmed. On further appeal, the First Circuit denied review, holding that courts may not re-evaluate the conclusions drawn from the factual findings de novo unless “any …

Masthead

California Regulatory Law Reporter

No abstract provided.

How The Supreme Court’S Inconsistent Approach To Granting Emergency Relief Will Exacerbate, Rather Than Mitigate The Disruption Its Emergency Stay Policy Is Supposed To Address, Harvey L. Reiter

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

The federal government has used the Supreme Court’s emergency or “shadow” docket to great effect this past year, securing stay after stay of lower court rulings that had blocked many of the President’s executive orders. But the Court’s rulings have come, almost invariably, without any explanation of its reasoning. And its opaque and uneven rulings have also come at a potential cost to the Court’s credibility. This Article illustrates the uneven nature of the Court’s rulings by contrasting two lines of cases: (1) the Court’s stays of lower court rulings restoring to their positions FTC, NLRB, EEOC, and MSPB members …