Administrative Law Commons^™

Volume 23 - Front Matter

DePaul Business & Commercial Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Legal Considerations On Predictive Policing Based On Italian ‘Algorithmic Administration’ Principles, Stefano Rossa

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

In Beck’s current risk society, the State is faced with a dilemma. To fail before the risk but to keep the sphere of citizens’ rights intact; or not to fail but to restrict fundamental rights? This payoff turns out to be the main issue that juridical reflections on the use of predictive technology tools in the public sector must consider. Policing is an administrative function that is mainly composed of acts of a preventive nature. By using ICT, it is possible to employ AI systems with a very high rate of certainty to ‘predict’ future crime scene. But is it …

Appeal No.1049: Gaia Exploration, Llc. V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Appeal of Chief's Order 2025-205

Appeal No.1045: Renee Beem Caughey V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management & Eog Resources, Inc., Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Appeal of Chief's 2025=123

Appeal No.1050: Big M. Petroleum Corporation V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Appeal of Chief's Orders 2015-250, 2025-251, 2025-252, and 2025-253

Appeal No.1051: Big M. Petroleum Corporation V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Appeal of Chief's Orders 2015-250, 2025-251, 2025-252, and 2025-253

Appeal No.1052: Big M. Petroleum Corporation V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Appeal of Chief's Orders 2015-250, 2025-251, 2025-252, and 2025-253

Appeal No.1053: Big M. Petroleum Corporation V. Division Of Oil & Gas Resources Management, Ohio Oil & Gas Commission

Ohio Oil & Gas Commission Decisions

Appeal of Chief's Orders 2015-250, 2025-251, 2025-252, and 2025-253

Separation-Of-Powers Lochnerism, Andrea Scoseria Katz

Fordham Law Review

One hundred and twenty years ago, in 1905, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered one of the single most notorious opinions in history, striking down a New York labor law for violating the right to contract—a right found nowhere in the text of the Constitution. Though the era of Lochner v. New York is well past us, the judicial impulses that gave rise to the case remain. With a new champion in the Roberts Court, Lochnerism is alive and well, deployed in a new context to redefine the relationships between the president, Congress, federal agencies, and the courts.

Bringing together two …

Using Political Privilege To Profit: Insider Trading In The Government And S. 2463'S Alleged Attempt To Stop It, Allison K. Dooling

MC Law Review

Insider trading is generally illegal within the United States. However, members of Congress are notorious for regularly engaging in stock trades based on government information that mirrors insider trading. In 2023, Senators Gillibrand and Hawley proposed a bill, unlike any such proposed before, to put an ultimate ban on government insider trading: the “Ban Stock Trading for Government Officials Act” or S. 2463. On its face, S. 2463 appears to address the criticisms surrounding government insider trading. It not only increases regulation and reporting standards but also bans government officials, their spouses, and their dependents from owning any stock during …

Who Counts As A "Reasonable Employee"? The Third Circuit's Bungling Of Section 8(A)(1) Violations, Ben Milstein

Washington Law Review

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) protects private employees’ right to unionize and collectively bargain with their employers. Section 7 of the NLRA guarantees employees the right to self-organize labor unions, while section 8 outlines numerous unfair labor practices. Specifically, section 8(a)(1) bans employer interference, coercion, or restraint of any section 7 rights. In a 2022 case, FDRLST Media v. NLRB, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) finding that FDRLST Media’s executive officer’s tweet constituted a section 8(a)(1) violation. This Comment examines the history of section 8(a)(1) violations, specifically discussing the widely …

General Rulemaking Grants And The Federal Trade Commission, Tamar Katz, Alex Lloyd George, Lev Menand, Tim Wu

Faculty Scholarship

The legal campaign against the administrative state has a new front: general rulemaking provisions. General rulemaking provisions authorize agencies, in an open-ended way, to write rules to carry out Congress’s directives. Administrative agencies have relied on such provisions for decades. But over the last several years, some litigators, scholars, and judges have advanced limiting theories that would, if applied widely, greatly reduce the ability of agencies to execute federal statutes. The leading edge of this campaign is an effort to negate the rulemaking authority of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The reasoning employed by the FTC’s opponents, already adopted by …

Institutional Sustainability In Ai Governance: Comparing Paths In The Eu, Japan, And Taiwan, Kuan-Wei Chen

Yearbook of Antitrust and Regulatory Studies

This article explores the concept of institutional sustainability in AI governance by comparing the approaches in the European Union, Japan, and Taiwan. It begins by arguing that the relationship between AI and sustainability extends beyond environmental concerns, encompassing the sustainability of governance institutions themselves. The article posits that institutional sustainability, referring to the capacity of governance frameworks to remain effective over time, is essential in the context of rapidly evolving and future-oriented AI governance. The analysis proceeds by examining the EU’s strategy of normative anchoring through legal codification, Japan’s agile governance model based on collaboration and coordination, and Taiwan’s digital …

Auer Deference: He Who Writes The Law Must Not Adjudge Its Violation, William G. Kennedy

MC Law Review

This Comment explores Auer deference and its application to the Sentencing Guidelines, the Sentencing Commission, and its commentary. Auer deference, in its simplest form, requires courts to give controlling weight to an agency’s interpretation of its own regulations unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation. Following the Court’s decision in Kisor—expressly limiting Auer’s application, the circuit courts have disagreed on the applicability of Auer to the Sentencing Commission’s commentary regarding career offender designation. This disagreement begs for an appearance before the Court of Last Resort, but until that day, the courts must rigidly apply Kisor to …

Not So Firmly Settled: How The Inconsistent Jurisprudence Of The Firm Resettlement Bar Serves As A Tool For Asylum Seeker Exclusion, Caroline V. Garrido

Fordham Law Review

The firm resettlement bar to asylum, designed to limit protections to those without refuge elsewhere, has become a source of inconsistency, confusion, and exclusion in U.S. asylum law. Circuit courts have adopted two different approaches for determining whether an asylum seeker has firmly resettled in a third country. Despite the Board of Immigration Appeals’ attempt to unify these approaches through the introduction of a burden-shifting framework, courts remain divided, and there is no clear guidance on what constitutes firm resettlement. This Note argues that this lack of guidance has led to inconsistent court holdings and interpretations that conflict with the …

Red, White-, And Blue-Collar Crime: Federal Sentencing Practices Among White-Collar And Blue-Collar Offenders, Henna Judge

Fordham Law Review

Under the current federal sentencing regime, district courts exercise immense amounts of discretion when sentencing. Though strict adherence to the U.S. Sentencing Commission Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) was once mandatory, courts must now use these Guidelines as an advisory starting point and make a series of fact-specific determinations when sentencing a defendant. Though judicial discretion in this realm aids in preventing undue reliance on Guidelines-range recommendations that can lack nuance, it also invites bias.

In recent years, scholars and courts alike have called attention to a potential disparity in the way blue-collar and white-collar offenders are sentenced. This Note examines relevant …

National Values Matter For Ai: Comparative Analysis Of Ai Regulations In The Us, The Eu, And China, Kaori (Furuya) Kawaguchi

Brooklyn Journal of International Law

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to evolve rapidly, governments worldwide face increasing pressure to regulate it. This Article focuses on regulatory approaches to AI in the United States, the European Union, and China, examining the underlying rationales: why have they taken these approaches? Each jurisdiction’s unique political institutions, historical preferences, and strategic priorities shape its approach to governance. In particular, the values the jurisdiction expects in technology shape its regulation. The US adopts a decentralized, innovation-friendly model rooted in reliance on market and self-regulation in industries with its strong trust in laissez-faire philosophy; the EU asserts global leadership in regulations …

Turbulence In The Courts: Jetblue Suffers From Faulty Antitrust Actions, Rudolph Veiga

Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law

Recently, the Department of Justice has become the leading force behind antitrust challenges against airline alliances and mergers. Unfortunately, it is difficult for someone to determine when the department will challenge an airline joint venture because the department has not consistently challenged all alliances or mergers over the last few years. JetBlue Airways defended itself against two different antitrust challenges by the department—one against the Northeast Alliance with American Airlines, and one against the acquisition of Spirit Airlines—and JetBlue lost both. The Department of Justice did not challenge the merger of Alaska Airlines and Hawaiian Airlines, which was finalized just …

Regulatory Settlement, Stare Decisis, And Loper Bright, Lisa Schultz Bressman, Kevin M. Stack

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

In Loper Bright v. Raimondo, the Supreme Court adopted and deployed a particular narrative about agency action in support of overruling Chevron: Agencies reverse their own statutory interpretations “as much as [they] like[],” creating pervasive instability in the law, thereby destroying private reliance interests. Based on a study of two decades of agency regulations affirmed by the D.C. Circuit under Chevron, we show how infrequently agencies reversed their interpretive positions. Our study suggests that the Court’s regulatory “whiplash” narrative is overstated and that there is an underappreciated institutional settlement for notice-and-comment rules under Chevron. Identifying this regulatory settlement …

Quasi-Judicial: A History And Tradition, Beau J. Baumann, Jed Handelsman Shugerman

Faculty Scholarship

In challenging the historical assumptions underlying the unitary executive theory, scholars have made several seemingly unrelated discoveries. First, "judicial" power was conceived in English law as a subset of "executive" authority. Second, Congress at or near the Founding insulated certain court-like comissions from presidential control. Finally, the "quasi-judicial" and "quasi-legislative" powers that were central to the holding of Humphrey's Executor flowed from a forgotten nineteenth-century legal tradition was guiding Congress's construction of the modern state. This Essay connects these findings into a single claim: generations of American stretching back past the Founding have instinctively insulated administrators granted quasi-judicial functions from …