Notice & Comment

Author: Christopher J. Walker

Notice & Comment

American Journal of Legal History Special Issue: Histories of Executive Power

The American Journal of Legal History has just published a special issue on “histories of executive power,” including a paper by Aaron Nielson and me entitled The Early Years of Congress’s Anti-Removal Power. These papers were first presented at a Stanford Constitutional Law Center conference, organized by Michael McConnell and Jed Shugerman, in May 2022. […]

Notice & Comment

Administrative Law SSRN Reading List, December 2023 Edition

January has gone by quickly, but here is the December 2023 Edition of the most-downloaded recent papers (those announced in the last 60 days) from SSRN’s U.S. Administrative Law eJournal, which is edited by Bill Funk. For more on why SSRN and this eJournal are such terrific resources for administrative law scholars and practitioners, check out my first […]

Notice & Comment

Conference at Harvard Law, 1/25: Doctrinal Crossroads: Major Questions, Nondelegation & Chevron Deference

Doctrinal Crossroads: Major Questions, Nondelegation & Chevron DeferenceThursday, January 25, 2024, at 8:15 a.m.-6:00 p.m. ESTLocation: Harvard Law School, 1585 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02138 Join Pacific Legal Foundation and the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy for our day-long law symposium, “Doctrinal Crossroads: Major Questions, Nondelegation & Chevron Deference.” The symposium will feature moderator-led discussions […]

Notice & Comment

1/4/2024 AALS/FedSoc Panel: The Future of Student Loan Cancellation, State Standing, and the Major Questions Doctrine after Biden v. Nebraska

At the Association of American Law Schools (AALS) annual meeting in Washington, DC, this week, I’ll be moderating a terrific panel on the student loan cancellation cases the Supreme Court decided last term. The panel will take place on Thursday, January 4, 2024, from 4:45-6:30PM, and it will be livestreamed here. Here’s a description of […]

Notice & Comment

Jotwell Administrative Law Section 2023 Year-End Review

Since 2015, I’ve served as co-editor, currently with the brilliant Miriam Seifter, of the the Administrative Law Section of The Journal of Things We Like (Lots) (“Jotwell”).  Jotwell is a terrific resource for administrative law practitioners and scholars. Roughly once a month, Jotwell’s Administrative Law Section publishes a short review of a current piece of administrative law scholarship, usually […]

Notice & Comment

Administrative Law SSRN Reading List, November 2023 Edition

Here is the November Edition of the most-downloaded recent papers (those announced in the last 60 days) from SSRN’s U.S. Administrative Law eJournal, which is edited by Bill Funk. For more on why SSRN and this eJournal are such terrific resources for administrative law scholars and practitioners, check out my first post on the subject here. You can check […]

Notice & Comment

CEI Report on Agency Adjudication Reform

Today, the Competitive Enterprise Institute has released a new report, by Ryan Young and Stone Washington, entitled Conflict of Justice: Making the Case for Administrative Law Court Reform. Here’s a taste of the report, from conclusion: Administrative law courts are unfair and regressive. They violate the separation of powers. They do not relieve regular court […]

Notice & Comment

Supreme Myths Podcast on Chevron, Jarkesy, MQD, and All Things Administrative Law

Earlier this week I sat down with Eric Segall to participate in his Supreme Myths podcast. We chatted about about all things administrative law, including the major questions doctrine, the current cases (Loper Bright and Relentless) before the Supreme Court challenging Chevron deference, and SEC v. Jarkesy, the constitutional challenge the Court heard last week […]

Notice & Comment

The Remedy in SEC v. Jarkesy

With the Supreme Court hearing argument in SEC v. Jarkesy on Wednesday, a lot of focus will be on the three separate constitutional questions presented in the case: The Fifth Circuit answered all three questions in the affirmative, and I would be shocked if the Supreme Court agreed on all three. But it’s quite possible […]