Scholars discuss the origins, scope, and merits of the U.S. Supreme Court’s “major questions doctrine.”
Scholars worry that regulating new technologies will be more difficult after recent Supreme Court decisions.
Scholar proposes a new fast-track legislative procedure to affirm agency regulatory authority.
To avoid potential legal challenges, agencies should take even more care in their regulatory planning, review, and communication.
Supreme Court decision hinders but does not halt agency action to address climate change.
Scholars argue that attacks on the constitutionality of federal climate change regulations distort the major questions doctrine.
Rejecting EPA’s ability to reshape the coal industry, the Court forecasts invalidating future agency actions.
In rejecting agency action on the basis of the “major questions doctrine,” judges undermine congressional policies.