President/Executive Department Commons^™

The President And The Power Grid, Alexandra B. Klass, Dave Owen

Michigan Law Review Online

There is a sharp discontinuity between the second Trump Administration’s electricity policies and those of previous presidential administrations. President Trump has directed the Department of Energy to use statutory authority designed for wartime conditions and sudden emergencies to prevent electric utilities from retiring aging coal plants. In doing so, he has elevated the president’s role in electric-grid governance and reduced the primacy of the expert regulatory agency—the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission—that Congress authorized to govern electricity markets and grid reliability.

This Essay places these actions in historical context. It recounts the executive branch’s role in electricity policy during the first …

The Library Of Congress At A Crossroads: Executive Overreach And The Future Of Public Knowledge, Leslie A. Street, Amanda M. Runyon

Library Staff Publications

This Article argues that the removal of the Librarian of Congress and the Register of Copyrights exposed a dual vulnerability: a constitutional breach of the separation of powers and a cultural threat to the nation’s knowledge infrastructure. The Library’s structural ambiguity—its simultaneous identity as a legislative library, national library, and copyright agency—has left it vulnerable to executive overreach. By asserting control over an institution designed to serve Congress and safeguard America’s intellectual heritage, the President destabilized a statutory framework that has endured for over two centuries. To protect both constitutional integrity and the Library’s role as custodian of national memory, …

Taking Legality Seriously: What The Major Questions Doctrine Is — And Isn't, Andrea Scoseria Katz, Ofra Bloch

Scholarship@WashULaw

The Major Questions Doctrine (MQD), a controversial recent innovation of the Roberts Court that applies stricter scrutiny to “major” actions taken by federal agencies, has faced criticism for being atextual, unprincipled, and nakedly ideological. But this critique misses the fact that the doctrine has near-exact analogues in many other legal systems, where it is an established tool for reining in executive overreach. This Article argues that, while the MQD reflects valid rule-of-law concerns, as applied, it lacks theoretical clarity, consistency and limits. More importantly, the Court itself lacks a theory of what the MQD is. We provide an answer grounded …

The Rise And [?] Of Anti-Administrativism, Gary Lawson

BYU Law Review

Scholars have proclaimed the administrative state to be “Under Siege” or subject to a “Never-Ending Assault.” Was the election of President Donald Trump on November 5, 2024, the sixth, if not yet the seventh, day around the walls?

This seems an appropriate time to consider the present and future of opposition to the administrative state—something that has come to be dubbed “anti-administrativism.” The first task, as is usually the case when one seeks intellectual clarity, is to figure out what one is talking about. What is this “anti-administrativism”? Without knowing the answer to that seemingly simple question, one cannot accurately …

Rethinking Judicial Power & Remedial Restraint, Caprice L. Roberts

Catholic University Law Review

This Article maintains that groundbreaking Supreme Court cases reshaping judicial power and restraint are frequently remedies centric. The much- anticipated ruling in Trump v. CASA illustrates this correlation. Interpreting traditional equity, the Supreme Court circumscribed federal judicial power to issue universal relief. The Court relied on Marbury v. Madison to bolster its reasoning on the limits of judicial power. Ironically, both cases denied any remedy while enhancing the potential for future judicial power. Whether via judicial review and supremacy power or the Court’s future ability to now be the only federal court able to issue universal remedies—the Court’s role in …

Gilded Executive Privilege: The Unstated Evidentiary Rule In Trump V. United States, Matthew D. Woodham, Ramona C. Albin

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

In Trump v. United States, the Supreme Court of the United States held that a former President has absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts within his core constitutional powers, presumptive immunity for all other official acts, and no immunity for private conduct undertaken while in office. Although the Court granted certiorari to address an immunity question, it then strayed into an evidentiary one in holding certain official acts evidence to be categorically inadmissible in the prosecution of private conduct. This Article interrogates the evidentiary foundation for this lesser-explored aspect of the Trump opinion and the danger …

How Armenia And Azerbaijan Are Lobbying For Influence In D.C., Gibran C. Boyce, Dawn Kikel

Capstones

In the wake of President Trump taking office, foreign government agencies and U.S.-based non-profits serving Armenian and Azerbaijani interests have been hiring lobbyists in Washington, D.C. as part of their concerted efforts to curry favor, gain influence, and seek policy changes that would benefit the rival post-Soviet nations.

Diplomacy Derailed: Discrimination’S Detour On Route 40, Gage A. Kivlen

Masters Theses, 2020-current

The 1961 Route 40 campaign in Maryland became a critical battleground where three competing approaches to addressing racial segregation revealed deep contradictions in Cold War America. Route 40, a major highway between Washington D.C. and New York, became an international embarrassment when African diplomats from newly independent nations were repeatedly refused service at restaurants and hotels. This crisis prompted responses from three distinct actors: the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), which employed grassroots organizing and direct action; the State Department's Special Protocol Service Section (SPSS), which pursued top-down diplomatic solutions; and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which conducted extensive …

Ai Procurement As Regulatory Reconnaissance, Sam Adler

Fordham Law Review

Artificial intelligence (AI) is a black box technology in a black box industry. Some view AI as a life-changing technology capable of advancing society and perhaps even saving the world, while others fear its capacity to harm. Like Dr. Frankenstein, developers fear the unpredictability of their own creations; deployers fear the unknown risks of third-party AI tools that market pressures drive them to assume; members of civil society fear AI’s capacity to oppress the already oppressed and degrade trust in institutions; and everyday users fear the undisclosed potential of AI to cause harm by means they cannot readily comprehend. These …

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 …

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 …

A Rendezvous With Destiny: The President's Ftc Removals And The Rule Of Law, George Sakkopoulos

Cleveland State Law Review

In March 2025, the President removed two commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”). The removed commissioners called the removals unlawful and challenged them in court, citing the FTC Act’s for-cause removal protection and the Supreme Court’s decision in Humphrey’s. After President Roosevelt removed an FTC commissioner, the Supreme Court in Humphrey’s in 1935 upheld the constitutionality of the FTC Act’s removal limitation based on the FTC being expert, nonpartisan/independent, quasi-judicial, and quasi-legislative. The Court in Seila in 2020 held that the President has “unrestricted removal power” as to the executive branch unless the Humphrey’s exception for “multimember expert …

Trump V. Slaughter: Brief Of Independent Agency Board Members And Scholars As Amici Curiae In Support Of Respondent, Samuel Bagenstos

Appellate Briefs

Amici are removed board members from independent federal agencies and scholars whose work includes the study of independent agencies and the separation of powers between the President and Congress. Amici advance the view that there are federal agencies whose responsibility for protecting the safety and stability of the national infrastructure or ensuring the structural integrity of government necessitates their independence. Significant negative consequences would likely follow if these agencies were to lose their independence and their work were to become politicized.

Presidential Power And Administrating Injustice In Removal Proceedings, Beth K. Zilberman

Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review

Presidential regime changes often lead to notable shifts in federal policy and raise important questions about how the executive branch manages high-volume adjudication systems within the broader administrative state. While managing an enormous caseload, federal mass-adjudication systems make determinations concerning individuals’ disputes with the government across various subject areas that disproportionately affect disadvantaged populations. The outcomes of these adjudication systems have profound impacts on the lives of vulnerable individuals compelled to appear before these administrative tribunals. The scale and life-altering consequences of these adjudications highlight the need for a deeper examination of the procedural protections afforded by agencies to some …

Competition, Comity, And Confusion: Reconciling The Ftaia’S Import Exclusion With Its Direct Effects Provision, Elliot Lam

Fordham Law Review

The debate surrounding the Sherman Act’s extraterritorial scope represents a tension between two competing objectives: protecting the U.S. economy from foreign anticompetitive conduct on one hand and respecting the sovereign authority of other nation-states on the other. Applying U.S. law abroad risks undermining sovereign authority by regulating foreign economies, though such regulation appears necessary in some cases to protect U.S. consumers.

Congress’s attempt to square these objectives through enacting the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (FTAIA) failed to settle the matter. The statute left courts with two new questions: how to distinguish “import” from “nonimport” commerce, and how …

Oligarchy, State, And Cryptopia, Julie E. Cohen

Fordham Law Review

Theoretical accounts of power in networked digital environments typically do not give systematic attention to the phenomenon of oligarchy—to extreme concentrations of material wealth deployed to obtain and protect durable personal advantage. The biggest technology platform companies are dominated to a singular extent by a small group of very powerful and extremely wealthy men who have played uniquely influential roles in structuring technological development in particular ways that align with their personal beliefs and who now wield unprecedented informational, sociotechnical, and political power. Developing an account of oligarchy and, more specifically, of tech oligarchy within contemporary political economy therefore has …

Beyond Mass Deportation, Nancy Plankey-Videla, Huyen Pham, Angela D. Morrison, Luz E. Herrera

Faculty Scholarship

Donald Trump’s threats to carry out the mass deportation of unauthorized immigrants helped propel him to a second term as President of the United States. For the estimated 11 million people in the U.S. without lawful status, those threats have increased fears of forced returns to their countries of origin. While American immigration law is heavily focused on the legal processes leading to deportation, little attention has been paid to the post-deportation experiences of individuals who must reintegrate into their home countries. This gap in understanding is especially alarming given the high stakes of reintegration. A successful transition can empower …

Removal: A Response To Professor Nelson, Philip A. Hamburger

Faculty Scholarship

In an essay published earlier this fall, Professor Caleb Nelson argues that, as a matter of originalism, the President does not have a constitutional power to remove executive officers. Professor Nelson is a renowned scholar, whose arguments could well influence the Supreme Court in two upcoming removal cases: Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook. It’s therefore important to evaluate whether his historical claim about removal is correct.

Living Property, Joseph William Singer

Seattle University Law Review

The Supreme Court has increasingly defined property rights that are per se exempt from regulation in the absence of compensation, most recently in Cedar Point Nursery v. Hassid (2021) and Tyler v. Hennepin County (2023). The Court claims that it can identify property rights that are categorically protected from regulation by reference to history, tradition, and precedent. Yet this approach is oddly ahistorical; it is inconsistent with the fact that property law changed dramatically over U.S. history, as well as varying tremendously among the states. It is also inconsistent with the historical context of the Founding era. At that time, …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents