Notice & Comment

Author: Andrew Hessick

Notice & Comment

Some Thoughts on Jared Kushner and the Anti-Nepotism Law

  In the past week, there has been a lot of discussion whether Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of Donald Trump, can serve as an advisor to Trump when he takes office. The concern is that hiring Kushner might violate the anti-nepotism laws. Under 5 U.S.C. § 3110(b), a “public official” cannot “appoint” or “employ” a […]

Notice & Comment

Expected Strategies for the New Administration

As the Trump administration prepares to take over, it has revealed some of the policy changes it plans to implement. These include reducing environmental restrictions, amping up enforcement of immigration rules, and deregulating businesses.  Trump’s administration will no doubt want to implement some of these changes faster than would be possible through the notice-and-comment- process.  […]

Notice & Comment

Auer, Mead, and Sentencing

Hear Auer deference, and you’re unlikely to think of criminal law.  After all, Auer deference is a doctrine of administrative law, and administrative law has traditionally been viewed as separate from criminal law.  And it’s true, Auer deference does not often come up in determining whether a substantive criminal violation has occurred. But Auer deference […]

Notice & Comment

A Sleeper Auer Case

Auer deference — the deference an agency receives when interpreting its own regulations — is one of the most powerful tools for the government in administrative law. But the doctrine has faced increasing criticism. Opponents have argued that the doctrine enables agencies to circumvent procedural safeguards by promulgating vague rules through notice and comment and […]

Notice & Comment

Legislative Efforts to Overturn Chevron

Chevron deference is a central feature of administrative law. But criticism of the doctrine has grown recently. One prominent example comes from Justice Thomas’s concurrence last year in Michigan v. EPA, which argued that Chevron deference is inconsistent with the Constitution. Although other justices have said that agencies have grown too powerful, none of those […]

Notice & Comment

Schwartz and Nelson on the SEC’s Regulation of Conflict Minerals

In Business Roundtable v. SEC, 647 F.3d 1144 (D.C. Cir. 2011), the D.C. Circuit held that the SEC must justify all its regulations promulgated under the National Securities Market Improvement Act through cost benefit analysis. Cost-benefit analysis makes sense for many SEC regulations because they focus on easily quantified matters. But they make less sense […]

Notice & Comment

Should Judges Who Sit on the Sentencing Commission Rule on the Legality of Sentencing Guidelines?

A few weeks ago, in United State v. Matchett, the Eleventh Circuit rejected a void for vagueness challenge to the career offender Sentencing Guideline, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2), which contains language that is identical to statutory language in 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B). The U.S. Supreme Court found that statutory language to be unconstitutionally vague at the […]

Notice & Comment

Justice Thomas’s Opinions on Administrative Law This Term

In recent terms, several justices have expressed concern about the breadth of powers held by administrative agencies. Those views have been expressed in concurrences and dissents. Agencies accordingly have not seen substantial changes to their authority—though one notable exception is King v. Burwell, which resulted in the Court strengthening Chevron step zero by saying that agencies […]

Notice & Comment

Mellouli v. Lynch and Brand X

Last week, the Supreme Court decided Mellouli v. Lynch, an immigration adjudication case raisingChevron issues. Chris Walker and Patrick Glen have written excellent posts on the decision here and here, but I thought I would add a few more thoughts. At issue in the case was the BIA’s interpretation of 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(B)(i), which authorizes […]

Notice & Comment

Zivotofsky and Spokeo

Last week, Will Baude published a column in the New York Times, available here, arguing that the Court should postpone deciding Zivotofsky v. Kerry, a case already argued this term, until it decidesSpokeo v. Robins, which is slated for next term. The two cases seem quite different. Zivotofsky is about Congress’s and the President’s power […]

Notice & Comment

Chris Walker on Agency Interpretation

Administrative agencies regularly interpret statutes in the course of rulemaking, but there is little data about how they go about interpreting those statutes. Do the rulemakers rely on canons of interpretation? Do they look at legislative history? These questions are important for many reasons, one of which is whether agencies act as faithful agents of […]

Notice & Comment

A Potentially Lurking Issue in a Recent Cert. Grant

On May 4, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in FERC v. Electric Power Supply Association (and a companion case). The case raises the question whether FERC exceeded its authority in issuing a regulation that gives retail energy customers incentives to reduce electricity consumption. The Federal Power Act (“FPA”) grants FERC the power to regulate the […]

Notice & Comment

The Incompatibility Clause and a Recent Rulemaking

Yesterday saw a fight over the Department of Defense’s proposed rule that would protect military families from predatory lending. The proposed regulation seeks to implement the Military Lending Act, which caps interest rates on loans to service members, by closing loopholes that have allow finance companies to continue offering high-interest loans to enlisted personnel. A […]

Notice & Comment

A Chance to Clarify Standing

On Monday, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins to resolve a basic question of Article III standing: Does a person has standing to sue to seek redress for the violation of a right, even if he did not suffer any other injury from the rights violation? This is the second time […]