Burning Man Sues the Federal Government Over Permitting Fees and a Sketchy Appeals Process
A federal lawsuit demands that the government honor its appeals process regarding the costs it imposes on the annual event.
A federal lawsuit demands that the government honor its appeals process regarding the costs it imposes on the annual event.
Oral argument was in July, so why hasn't the court issued an opinion yet?
If a case warrants an expedited appeal, the Justice Department should act like it.
Judge Bybee's concurrence in decision rejecting challenge to "public charge" rule raises concerns about Congress's abdication of responsibility on immigration policy.
The Supreme Court will not rehear Gundy v. United States, but Justice Kavanaugh seems ready to revisit the doctrine.
How the FDA lost, and gained, jurisdiction over cigarettes -- to a Newfoundland fishing-boat tune
The Supreme Court will consider a constitutional challenge to the composition of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
In a lengthy opinion, a divided three-judge panel turns away most of the legal challenges to the Federal Communications Commission's "Restoring Internet Freedom" Order
Tools exist to modify the incentives for legislative action, and Congress could deploy some of those tools itself to encourage more regular reauthorization and modernization of federal regulatory programs.
Will the courts ever be willing to curb excessive delegation? If not, could Congress learn to constrain itself?
The Supreme Court reined in Auer deference. Will lower court get the message?
Sometimes it is not the breadth of legislative delegation that is a problem, so much as it is the age (and potential obsolescence) of such delegation, and that's something Congress should learn to address.
The ruling comes after a long string of losses blocking other administration efforts to deny federal law enforcement funds to sanctuary jurisdictions. The different result in this case is largely a product of the unusual nature of the program involved.
The ruling upholds a trial court decision holding that the president cannot divert military funds to builds his proposed border wall.
What's the difference between the plurality's and the (quasi-)dissent's positions? The ability of agencies to overrule court interpretations in the future.
The Court's four liberal justicces joined the majority in all three of today's Supreme Court's decisions
Today's ruling in Gundy v. United States allows Congress to delegate to the executive broad power to create new criminal offenses. But there is hope the Court might reconsider Gundy in the future.
Concern about Chevron Deference Would Be Better Focused on Delegation
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Gorsuch suggests it's a good thing when parties don't rely upon the Chevron doctrine.
In a just-filed brief, the Trump Administration asks Supreme Court to reduce the degree of deference government agencies receive.
Eliminating judicial deference to administrative agencies' interpretations of federal law would not destroy the administrative state, or even significantly reduce the amount of regulation. But it would have some real benefits, nonetheless.
The justices show little interest in deferring to agency interpretations.
Did the settlement with the distributor of home gun-making hardware and software remove computer files from the United States Munitions List or just temporarily stop treating them as affected munitions?
How will a Justice Kavanaugh approach administrative law cases?
The debate over Judge Kavanaugh's views on executive power actually encompasses four separate issues. On some of them his views bode well for the future, on others not so much.
Jonathan Adler says he's "supremely qualified," an originalist, and a critic of the administrative state. But he's a cipher when it comes to defendants' rights.
Like Neil Gorsuch, the D.C. Circuit judge has criticized Chevron deference for encouraging executive arrogance.
How much deference should amicus briefs and agency advocacy receive from the courts?
The ruling also raises questions about the future viability of "Chevron deference."
Justice Kennedy calls for reconsidering parts of the Court's Chevron jurisprudence.
In a concurring opinion issued today, the Supreme Court's key swing vote justice expressed serious misgivings about a major Supreme Court precedent requiring courts to defer to executive branch administrative agencies.
In recent decision, judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit debate the finer points of finality under the Administrative Procedure Act.