Introduction In its 2024 decision overruling the decades-old Chevron[1] doctrine directing judges to accept an agency’s reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutory language,[2] the Supreme Court declared: “[A]gencies have no special competence in resolving statutory ambiguities. Courts do.”[3] In this Article, we reveal this statement to be a profoundly blinkered assertion of judicial hubris. We present […] Continue Reading >
Introduction When it comes to the federal judiciary, commentators often fixate on those 800 or so “Article III” judges who are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.[1] During his first term in office, President Trump nominated and the Senate confirmed 234 judges to Article III federal courts, including three Supreme Court […] Continue Reading >
The Beleaguered Sovereign: Judicial Restraints on Public Enforcement
Working with Statutes
The Beleaguered Sovereign: Judicial Restraints on Public Enforcement
Introduction What will history say about the Roberts Court and, indeed, the federal courts more generally over the past generation? Undoubtedly, one of the core themes will be the Supreme Court’s role in undermining marketplace regulation by making it increasingly difficult for individuals and administrative agencies to redress statutory violations and implement regulatory policy.[1] The […] Continue Reading >