Tag Archives: deregulation

My Talk at “Regulatory Change & the Trump Administrative State”

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Monday, Apr. 1, 2019@BridgetDooling

I’m following Professor Aaron Nielson’s (BYU) lead and sharing an abbreviated summary of my remarks from the recent & excellent day-long Yale Journal on Regulation conference on “Regulatory Change & the Trump Administrative State.” I was delighted to be part of the panel on “Changes in Administrative Law in the Executive Branch,” along with Professors […]

Ferrets Ahead? Trump’s Regulatory “Two-for-One” Litigation Moves on to (at least some measure of) Discovery

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Saturday, Feb. 9, 2019@BridgetDooling

There was a big development in the litigation challenging Trump’s regulatory “two-for-one” executive order last night. As I blogged about earlier, Judge Moss previously dismissed the case for lack of standing on February 26, 2018. Plaintiffs requested the ability to amend their complaint in light of the opinion, which the government did not oppose. That second […]

The Shutdown’s Evolving Effects on Rulemaking

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Thursday, Jan. 17, 2019@BridgetDooling

I have a piece up in The Hill with some initial thoughts about 5 ways the partial federal shutdown is playing out in the rulemaking process. The punchline is that the longer key aspects of the federal regulatory process remain idle, the harder it will be for the president to make progress on his deregulatory goals. […]

Spotlight on HHS Entries in OIRA’s Latest Regulatory Reform Report

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Friday, Nov. 30, 2018@BridgetDooling

Earlier this week I posted a new report over at the GW Regulatory Studies Center that sheds some light on the inner workings of this administration’s ongoing regulatory two-for-one initiative. As you might recall, Executive Order 13771 imposed new constraints on executive branch regulatory agencies, directing them to cut two rules for any new rule issued and to […]

The CRA Spring Gun May Soon Fire its First Shot

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Wednesday, Nov. 21, 2018@BridgetDooling

Earlier this month the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued a proposed rule that may turn out to be the first opportunity to test the Congressional Review Act (CRA) post-disapproval restriction on rulemaking. The CRA authorizes Congress to use an expedited process to nullify recent rules. It has been used successfully 17 times, 16 of which […]

Highlights of the Brookings Series on Regulatory Process and Perspective

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Tuesday, Nov. 6, 2018@BridgetDooling

Last year, Chris Walker shared a heads up about a series hosted by the Brookings Center on Regulation and Markets on Regulatory Process and Perspective. The series has developed really nicely, offering a data-driven insights in this important field. A few recent highlights that I keep coming back to for reference: Trump’s deregulatory efforts keep […]

Big Day for Reg Watchers!

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2018@BridgetDooling

It’s a big day for folks who follow regulation! The Unified Agenda of Regulatory (and Deregulatory) Actions for Fall 2018 rolled out today along with a report on the FY 2018 results of the President’s regulatory two-for-one initiative. These are important documents because, respectively, they give us a snapshot of the government’s plans for the next […]

Standing Arguments in Litigation Challenging Trump’s Regulatory “Two-for-One” EO (Part 2)

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Monday, Oct. 1, 2018@BridgetDooling

This post picks up where my last post left off, recapping aspects of the initial memorandum opinion and order in Public Citizen, Inc. et al v. Trump (D.D.C.). This is the case challenging President Trump’s regulatory “two-for-one” executive order (EO 13771). In the course of its discussion on associational standing, the court considers whether the […]

Standing Arguments in Litigation Challenging Trump’s Regulatory “Two-for-One” EO (Part 1)

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Tuesday, Sept. 25, 2018@BridgetDooling

In my last post on this topic, I offered a brief summary of the litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging President Trump’s regulatory “two-for-one” executive order, EO 13771. In short, the case was initially dismissed for lack of standing, the plaintiffs amended their complaint, the government responded, and we […]

Update: Litigation Challenging Trump’s Regulatory “Two-for-One” EO

by Bridget C.E. Dooling — Tuesday, Sept. 4, 2018@BridgetDooling

You might recall that nine days after President Trump issued Executive Order 13,771, a set of influential interest groups filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. That challenge, filed by Public Citizen, Inc., Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., and Communications Workers of America, AFL-CIO on February 8, 2017, is still […]