Notice & Comment

Notice & Comment

Notice & Comment

Sunstein & Vermeule on Administrative Law’s Morality (and 2017 AdLaw Year in Review)

This year has been an eventful one for administrative law, to put it mildly. We have had a change in presidential administration, with an accompanying focus on deregulation across the federal bureaucracy and mission re-orientation at a number of federal agencies. One agency (the CFPB) currently has dueling acting directors—one appointed by the outgoing agency head and the other […]

Notice & Comment

Judicial exceptionalism and its corrosive effects

I almost never read the comments on these posts–that’s rule number 1 for anyone active in internet life–but saw an alert to approve/disapprove a comment on my last post. It was from an anonymous litigator in the 9th Circuit, but it’s very good and worthy of considering what we do when we fetishize and worship […]

Notice & Comment

Recess Appointments Revisited

In January, I wrote that recess appointments would likely return this year because the same party controls the presidency, Senate, and House of Representatives.   With an upcoming recess, I thought now would be a good time to revisit the subject and figure out why I was wrong. The Constitution gives “[t]he President [the] Power to fill up […]

Notice & Comment

Vacating an EEOC rule on wellness programs

A few months back, I flagged an opinion from a D.C. district court holding that a new EEOC rule governing wellness programs was arbitrary and capricious. The rule allowed employers to impose huge penalties on employees who refused to participate in wellness programs, even though the Americans with Disabilities Act says those programs must be […]

Notice & Comment

The CFPB is now a part of the White House. That’s illegal.

Agency independence is a funny thing. Its existential legitimacy is the subject of a searing debate. The Harvard Law Review solicited an essay from Gillian Metzger that dives into the nature of administrative separation and independence (including with a reply essay from our own Aaron Nielson). And the en banc DC Circuit is currently reviewing […]

Notice & Comment

Brookings Series on Regulatory Process and Perspective

Over at Brookings’ Center on Regulation and Markets, Philip Wallach has started a terrific new Regulatory Process and Perspective Series, with Anne Joseph O’Connell, Rachel Augustine Potter, and Connor Raso as regular contributors. Here is Wallach’s introduction to the series: Regulatory process” is a phrase that can’t help but sound boring— to many people, it […]

Notice & Comment

Can insurers sue to recover cost-sharing money?

Murray-Alexander is going nowhere. Senator Collins insists that passing the bipartisan legislation, which would restore cost-sharing payments for two years, is a condition of her vote on the pending tax bill. But she appears willing to accept airy promises that Senate leadership will make the bill a priority. Never mind that House Republicans have no […]

Notice & Comment

Congress Just Allowed President Trump to Estimate the Official Costs of Tax Reform

Republicans plan to pass a deficit increasing tax-reform proposal, but the Pay-As-You-Go Act (PAYGO) requires that legislation cannot increase the deficit within a five-year or ten-year window.  If legislation would increase the deficit in either window, an offsetting, automatic sequestration would kick in.  Although the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) […]

Notice & Comment

Regulatory Review Series on Verkuil’s Valuing Bureaucracy

Paul Verkuil, former Chair of the Administrative Conference of the United States and former law school dean at Tulane and Cardozo, published an important new book this summer entitled Valuing Bureaucracy: The Case for Professional Government (Cambridge University Press). Here’s the description of the book from the CUP website: To be effective, government must be […]

Notice & Comment

Enjoining the contraception rules

On Friday afternoon, a district court in Pennsylvania enjoined the Trump administration’s new rules on contraception coverage from taking effect. The court’s ruling was not unexpected: I’d argued earlier that the rules were vulnerable on both procedural and substantive grounds, and the court’s analysis largely tracks my own. Procedurally, the Trump administration had no good […]