Notice & Comment

Notice & Comment

Notice & Comment

Ending Judge-Shopping in Cases Challenging Federal Law, by Joseph Mead

The Judicial Conference of the United States recently directed federal district courts to assign cases that seek broad relief, such as a challenge to a federal regulation, randomly on a district-wide basis. The judicial conference’s guidance follows similar statements by the American Bar Association, proposals to amend the federal rules, and proposed legislation.  In any other era, this minutia of […]

Notice & Comment

Vullo and Trevino: The Supreme Court’s Current Term and the NRA’s Fight Against Retaliatory Regulatory Enforcement, by Adam Candeub

Gun rights’ advocates often quip “The Second Amendment protects the other nine.” Now, the National Rifle Association is hoping in two separate, but related cases that the First Amendment will protect it from what it claims is the State of New York’s unlawful regulatory and administrative enforcement.  On March 18 the Supreme Court will hear NRA […]

Notice & Comment

The Costs of KOSA?, by Lawrence J. Spiwak

It is widely believed that social media is, at least in part, responsible for the deteriorating mental health of America’s adolescents and teens.  Politicians have taken notice, and in an election season they are keen to score points with voters back home.  Yet, succumbing to the pressure to do something by November risks ill-formed legislation.  Such is the […]

Notice & Comment

A Way Forward for the SEC and Crypto: The SEC’s History of Tailoring Regulatory Frameworks for Nontraditional Securities

The SEC Chair has stated that in his view, the “vast majority” of cryptoassets are securities, meaning that these products—and market participants—are subject to the federal securities laws and SEC rules.[1]  This poses a conundrum: Compliance with aspects of the securities laws and existing SEC rules is not attainable for cryptoasset securities,[2] absent further regulatory or […]

Notice & Comment

The New Nondelegation: Response to Piatt and Morgan’s “The Three Major Questions Doctrines,” by Brian Chen

There is much hubbub over the major questions doctrine. For good reason. The Supreme Court has lately invoked the doctrine to invalidate sweeping regulatory initiatives, such as the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, OSHA’s workplace vaccine mandate, and the CDC’s eviction moratorium. There is now a cottage industry of law reviews trying to make sense of […]

Notice & Comment

Ad Law Reading Room: “Governing by Assignment,” by Isaac Cui, Daniel E. Ho, Olivia Martin, and Anne Joseph O’Connell

Today’s Ad Law Reading Room entry is “Governing by Assignment,” by Isaac Cui, Daniel E. Ho, Olivia Martin, and Anne Joseph O’Connell, which is forthcoming in the University of Pennsylvania Law Review. Here is the abstract: A pillar of administrative law is expertise, but government is increasingly missing experts. The U.S. federal government faces a […]

Notice & Comment

Whose Role Is It Anyway? Distinguishing Corporate Officers From Directors, by Matthew Bisanz, Lawrence Cunningham, and Grace Kim

Most legal entities, like corporations, have officers and directors who, together, run the business. Directors sit on the board of directors and collectively govern and oversee the entity. In contrast, officers generally implement the board’s vision and manage the day-to-day operations of the business.  While there is widespread agreement that the roles and responsibilities of officers and […]

Notice & Comment

The Three Major Questions Doctrines, by Austin Piatt & Damonta D. Morgan

Our recent Essay in the Wisconsin Law Review Forward explores the question, what do multiple versions of the major questions doctrine mean for the future of legislation? We observe that, after West Virginia v. EPA, 597 U.S. 697 (2022) and Biden v. Nebraska, 143 S.Ct. 2355 (2023), we now have three versions of the major questions doctrines: The “clear […]