The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Congratulations to My Brother Sasha, on Today's Citation by Justice Jackson
From Justice Jackson's concurrence today in FCC v. Consumers' Research:
Respondents in this case have challenged the Federal Communications Commission's universal-service program under both the traditional nondelegation doctrine and the private nondelegation doctrine. The Court properly rejects both challenges today, and I join the Court's opinion in full. I write separately to express my skepticism that the private nondelegation doctrine—which purports to bar the Government from delegating authority to private actors—is a viable and independent doctrine in the first place. Nothing in the text of the Constitution appears to support a per se rule barring private delegations. And recent scholarship highlights a similar lack of support for the doctrine in our history and precedents. See, e.g., A. Volokh, The Myth of the Federal Private Nondelegation Doctrine, 99 Notre Dame L. Rev. 203 (2023).
Nice.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
This is the singing movie maker, right? He ought to post more of them.
Since we're on the subject of scholars cited in today's decisions (and congrats, Sasha), I think similar plaudits are due Sam Bray, whose work on remedies is all over the CASA majority opinion. Justice Barrett clearly treats Bray's recent work as the most important work out there right now on equity in remedies and remedies in general. I don't think it goes too far to say that she treats Bray's article "Multiple Chancellors" as a, if not the, key source of support for the Court's holding. Thomas's concurrence relies heavily on Bray too.
One might wonder whether, if Bray had not published this recent work (which seems to me to be excellent), the vote and the outcome might have been different. Whether or not one agrees with the decision, for a scholar that is a big deal. Congrats, Professor Bray.
Samuel Bray was also cited, maybe unsurprising. Not sure if he is still a contributor here. Also Baude.
It's kvell time!
Is being cited by Justice Jackson really something to be proud of? Sorry, just wondering.
After what Justice Barrett wrote about her, it's probably insulting to be quoted by a Justice who doesn't understand technicalities or legalese.