Scholars discuss some of the Court’s most significant regulatory decisions.
The Supreme Court relied on misleading arguments and revisionist history to strike down the CFPB’s structure.
Requiring government institutions to engage in reasoned decision-making mitigates actions made in bad faith.
The Supreme Court has destabilized principles on federal agencies’ structures and for-cause removal.
Scholars and practitioners highlight the Court’s most significant regulatory and administrative law decisions.
Executive and legislative branches of Spain’s government wield debatable legal authority in times of crisis.
The Constitution requires the Supreme Court to ensure that the President does not abuse emergency powers.
Scholars contend that the President may revoke monument designations made during previous administrations.
The Supreme Court should follow the Fourth Circuit in prohibiting impermissible animus while maintaining the President’s discretion.
Scholar argues that policymakers should apply the substance of executive branch lethal force regulations to the police context.
D.C. Circuit weighs constitutionality of the consumer financial watchdog’s organizational structure.
The United States needs a bipartisan push to bring transparency and accountability back into the rulemaking process.