Scholars examine the Court’s most important regulatory decisions of this past term.
The U.S. Supreme Court concluded its 2025–2026 term with decisions that reshaped aspects of presidential power and federal regulatory authority. The term marked a series of significant, though not uniform, victories for the Trump Administration. The Court expanded presidential control over independent agencies, permitted the Administration to proceed with terminating temporary protections for many Haitian and Syrian nationals, and narrowed the reach of the Voting Rights Act.
But the Court also rejected the Administration’s sweeping tariff program and upheld birthright citizenship. In addition, the Court handed down other notable decisions addressing issues related to voting rights, securities enforcement, pesticide labels, and many more.
For the 12th consecutive year, The Regulatory Review is proud to publish its annual series of essays examining the Supreme Court’s regulatory decisions from the preceding term. This series assembles contributions from prominent legal scholars and practitioners who examine the major decisions of the last term and consider their implications for law, governance, regulatory policy, and individual rights.
The series features essays from the following contributors: Emily S. Bremer of the University of Notre Dame Law School; William W. Burke-White of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; Jonathan Cedarbaum of The George Washington University Law School; Susan Dudley of The George Washington University Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration; Samuel Estreicher of New York University School of Law; Jean Galbraith of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; Michael Herz of Cardozo School of Law; Benjamin Keener, a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; Ronald M. Levin of Washington University School of Law; Jud Mathews of Penn State Dickinson Law; Sarah Paoletti of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; Zachary Price of the University of California College of the Law, San Francisco; Arden Rowell of the University of Illinois College of Law; Joshua Sellers of the University of Texas School of Law; Peter Shane of New York University School of Law; Jed Shugerman of Boston University School of Law; Urska Velikonja of Georgetown University Law Center; Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia of Penn State Dickinson Law; Keith Whittington of Yale Law School; Matthew Lee Wiener of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School; Ilan Wurman of the University of Minnesota Law School; and David Zaring of the University of Pennsylvania Wharton School.
Independent Agencies Get a Second Opinion
July 13, 2026 | Susan Dudley, The George Washington University Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration
Trump v. Slaughter may force independent agencies to provide more rigorous justifications for new rules.
A Voting Rights Catastrophe
July 14, 2026 | Joshua Sellers, University of Texas School of Law
In Callais, the Supreme Court guts the remainder of the Voting Rights Act.
Seeing the Trees, But Ignoring the Forest
July 15, 2026 | Jean Galbraith, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
The Supreme Court strikes down President Trump’s tariffs but leaves the big issue of abusive presidential power unaddressed.
Contesting the Meaning of Citizenship
July 16, 2026 | Benjamin Keener, a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School and Keith Whittington, Yale Law School
In Trump v. Barbara, the Justices’ arguments underscore competing approaches to constitutional interpretation.
Article II Removal Power and the Roberts Court’s Reckless Hubris
July 20, 2026 | Peter Shane, New York University School of Law
Trump v. Slaughter’s reckless hubris may unleash presidential power to punish and paralyze.
Trade Regulation by Emergency
July 20, 2026 | William W. Burke-White, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
A Supreme Court decision limits presidential tariff power.
The Supreme Court Is Answering Easy Questions
July 21, 2026 | Urska Velikonja, Georgetown University Law Center
The Supreme Court’s case selection reveals a hesitancy to tackle major securities law issues.
Unanswered Questions After the Court’s Birthright Citizenship Decision
July 21, 2026 | Ilan Wurman, University of Minnesota Law School
The opinions in Trump v. Barbara raise unresolved questions about executive and judicial power.
The Supreme Court Green Lights TPS Terminations for Haiti and Syria
July 22, 2026 | Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, Penn State Dickinson Law
A sweeping ruling on temporary protected status tests judicial review, directly impacting thousands.
Administrative Law’s Conceptual Revolution
July 22, 2026 | Emily S. Bremer, University of Notre Dame Law School
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Trump v. Slaughter will reshape administrative law.
Misframing the Trump-Era Appropriations Battles
July 23, 2026 | Zachary Price, University of California College of the Law, San Francisco
Appropriations should serve as substantive limits on executive power.
The Tariff Case and the Major Questions Doctrine
July 24, 2026 | Ronald M. Levin, Washington University School of Law
After Learning Resources, the major questions doctrine appears more tenuous.
The End of NRC Independence and the Future of Nuclear Safety
July 27, 2026 | Arden Rowell, University of Illinois College of Law and Jud Mathews, Penn State Dickinson Law
Can nuclear safety survive presidential control after the demise of NRC independence?
EPA-Approved Pesticide Labels Reign Supreme
July 28, 2026 | Michael Herz, Cardozo School of Law
Roundup’s label win reshapes glyphosate litigation but not the whole preemption field.
Preserving the Adjudicative Capacity of Non-Article III Tribunals
July 28, 2026 | Samuel Estreicher, New York University School of Law
After Trump v. Slaughter, can non-Article III tribunals survive presidential control?
Expanded Deference, Diminished Review, Relief Restricted
July 29, 2026 | Sarah Paoletti, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Urias-Orellana narrows asylum review, raising the stakes for judicial oversight.
Legislative History and Implied Causes of Action in Retreat
July 29, 2026 | David Zaring, University of Pennsylvania Wharton School
Saba Capital reveals how statutory interpretation shapes investor power and fund accountability.
Federal Spending Will Be the Next Big Separation-of-Powers Fight
July 30, 2026 | Jonathan Cedarbaum, The George Washington University Law School
The Supreme Court previews the constitutional clash over who controls federal spending.
The Fate of Independent Adjudication and the Civil Service?
July 30, 2026 | Jed Shugerman, Boston University School of Law
Agency independence faces a reckoning as the Court reshapes power, history, and adjudication.
A Modest Win for Agency Adjudication
July 31, 2026 | Matthew Lee Wiener, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
The Supreme Court upholds a high-stakes adjudication system, but important constitutional questions remain.
