Startseite Sozialwissenschaften The Major Questions Doctrine: Judicial Power and the Prevalence of Policy Drift in the United States
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

The Major Questions Doctrine: Judicial Power and the Prevalence of Policy Drift in the United States

  • Kumar Ramanathan ORCID logo EMAIL logo und Warren Snead ORCID logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 28. Januar 2025
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill
The Forum
Aus der Zeitschrift The Forum Band 22 Heft 4

Abstract

A major challenge of governance in the United States is policy drift, the phenomenon wherein a policy’s outcomes are transformed due to a failure to update its rules or structures to meet changing circumstances. Policy drift has been prevalent in recent decades due to declining legislative productivity, a veto-riddled legislative process, and the rapid pace of technological and environmental change. We argue that the emergence of the “major questions doctrine” in Supreme Court jurisprudence is likely to exacerbate the problem of policy drift. This new doctrine enables courts to declare administrative actions as invalid if they are “novel” or of “economic or political significance” and lack “clear congressional authorization.” This doctrine, which departs from past standards that were more deferential to agencies, exacerbates the likelihood of policy drift by limiting the capacity of agencies to actively adapt policy implementation to changing circumstances. By rendering agency action suspect on the basis of novelty or significance, the doctrine limits action in precisely those policy domains most in need of adaptation. We show the relationship between the doctrine and policy drift through case studies of three policy domains (air pollution, student loan debt, and workplace vaccine mandates). We then examine how the doctrine has already begun to spread through lower courts, where its impact is likely to be felt most strongly. Finally, we discuss the normative and theoretical implications of our analysis, noting how the doctrine further concentrates power in the judiciary and undermines democratic accountability and transparency in the policy process.


Corresponding author: Kumar Ramanathan, Bridge-to-Faculty Postdoctoral Scholar, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, USA, E-mail:
Kumar Ramanathan and Warren Snead contributed equally to this work.

Acknowledgments

We thank Chloe Thurston, Jack McGovern, and reviewers at The Forum for their feedback and Lauren Mermelstein for research assistance.

References

Aldy, Joseph E., Maximilian Auffhammer, Maureen Cropper, Arthur Fraas, and Richard Morgenstern. 2022. “Looking Back at 50 Years of the Clean Air Act.” Journal of Economic Literature 60 (1): 179–232. https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20201626.Suche in Google Scholar

Applegate, Zoe. 2013. “Guy Stewart Callendar: Global Warming Discovery Marked.” BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-norfolk-22283372 (accessed April 24, 2013).Suche in Google Scholar

Bailey, Michael A., and Forrest Maltzman. 2011. The Constrained Court: Law, Politics, and the Decisions Justices Make. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.23943/princeton/9780691151045.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Barnes, Jeb. 2008. “Courts and the Puzzle of Institutional Stability and Change: Administrative Drift and Judicial Innovation in the Case of Asbestos.” Political Research Quarterly 61 (4): 636–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1065912908317028.Suche in Google Scholar

Barnett, Kent, and Christopher J. Walker. 2017. “Chevron in the Circuit Courts.” Michigan Law Review 116 (1): 1–73. https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.116.1.chevron.Suche in Google Scholar

Barnett, Kent, Christina L. Boyd, and Christopher J. Walker. 2018. “The Politics of Selecting Chevron Deference.” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 15 (3): 597–619. https://doi.org/10.1111/jels.12187.Suche in Google Scholar

Better Markets. 2023. “Actions in the Federal Courts – Month in Review Newsletter – September 2023.” Better Markes (blog). https://bettermarkets.org/newsroom/actions-in-the-federal-courts-month-in-review-newsletter-september-2023/ (accessed September 28, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Biden, Joseph R. 2020. “My Plan to Safely Reopen America.” New York Times, April 12, 2020, sec. Opinion. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/opinion/joe-biden-coronavirus-reopen-america.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Biden, Joseph R. 2022. “Remarks by President Biden Announcing Student Loan Debt Relief Plan.” The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/08/25/remarks-by-president-biden-announcing-student-loan-debt-relief-plan/ (accessed August 25, 2022).Suche in Google Scholar

Biesecker, Michael, and Sam Hananel. 2016. “Supreme Court Puts Obama’s Clean Power Plan on Hold.” AP News. https://apnews.com/united-states-government-98b898c2ea124bf0bc7eb12d1584d12f (accessed February 9, 2016).Suche in Google Scholar

Bowers, Kate R. 2022. “The Major Questions Doctrine.” In Focus IF12077. Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12077.Suche in Google Scholar

Breyer, Stephen. 1986. “Judicial Review of Questions of Law and Policy.” Administrative Law Review 38 (4): 363–98.Suche in Google Scholar

Brown, Lisa. 2022. “Letter to Miguel Cardona.” In The Secretary’s Legal Authority for Debt Cancellation. https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/leg/foia/secretarys-legal-authority-for-debt-cancellation.pdf (accessed August 23, 2022).Suche in Google Scholar

Brunstein, Natasha, and Richard L. Revesz. 2022. “Mangling the Major Questions Doctrine.” Administrative Law Review 74: 217–8.10.2139/ssrn.3927233Suche in Google Scholar

Castro-Root, Gabe. 2022. “What the Supreme Court’s Blockbuster Climate Ruling Means for North Carolina.” Charlotte Observer. https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/business/article263211488.html (accessed July 10, 2022).Suche in Google Scholar

CDC. 2020. COVID Data Tracker. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker (accessed March 28, 2020).Suche in Google Scholar

Coenen, Michael, and Seth Davis. 2017. “Minor Courts, Major Questions.” Vanderbilt Law Review 70 (3): 777–844.Suche in Google Scholar

Congressional Research Service. 2015. “The OSH Act: A Legal Overview.” CRS Report R43768. Congressional Research Service.Suche in Google Scholar

Daval, C. Joseph Ross, Liam Bendicksen, and Aaron S. Kesselheim. 2023. “Eroding Judicial Deference to the FDA – Consequences for Public Health.” New England Journal of Medicine 388 (11): 963–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2215193.Suche in Google Scholar

Davenport, Coral. 2015. “Court Gives Obama a Climate Change Win.” New York Times, June 9, 2015, sec. U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/10/us/coal-epa-clean-power-plan.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Davenport, Coral. 2016. “Obama Climate Plan, Now in Court, May Hinge on Error in 1990 Law.” New York Times, September 25, 2016, sec. U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/us/politics/obama-court-clean-power-plan.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Deacon, Daniel, and Leah Litman. 2023. “The New Major Questions Doctrine.” Virginia Law Review 109 (5): 1009–94.Suche in Google Scholar

Department of Education. 2020. “Secretary DeVos Extends Student Loan Forbearance Period through January 31, 2021.” In Response to COVID-19 National Emergency. U.S. Department of Education. https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USED/bulletins/2afbc4b (accessed December 4, 2020).Suche in Google Scholar

Department of Education. 2022. Biden-Harris Administration Extends Student Loan Pause through August 31|U.S. Department of Education. U.S. Department of Education. https://www.ed.gov/news/press-releases/biden-harris-administration-extends-student-loan-pause-through-august-31 (accessed April 6, 2022).Suche in Google Scholar

Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Strategic Preparedness and Response. n.d. “List of Public Health Emergency Declarations.” https://aspr.hhs.gov:443/legal/PHE/Pages/default.aspx (accessed November 23, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Donnelly, Patrick G. 1982. “The Origins of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.” Social Problems 30 (1): 13–25. https://doi.org/10.2307/800181.Suche in Google Scholar

Elinson, Gregory A., and Jonathan S. Gould. 2022. “The Politics of Deference.” Vanderbilt Law Review 75 (2): 475–552.Suche in Google Scholar

EPA. 2015. “FACT SHEET: Overview of the Clean Power Plan.” Overviews and Factsheets. United States Environmental Protection Agency, August 2015. https://archive.epa.gov/epa/cleanpowerplan/fact-sheet-overview-clean-power-plan.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Epstein, Lee, William M. Landes, and Richard A. Posner. 2013. “How Business Fares in the Supreme Court.” Minnesota Law Review 97 (4): 1431–73.Suche in Google Scholar

Eskridge, William N. 1991. “Overriding Supreme Court Statutory Interpretation Decisions.” The Yale Law Journal 101 (2): 331–455. https://doi.org/10.2307/796805.Suche in Google Scholar

Eskridge, William N., and Lauren E. Baer. 2008. “The Continuum of Deference: Supreme Court Treatment of Agency Statutory Interpretations from Chevron to Hamdan.” The Georgetown Law Journal 96 (4): 1083–226.10.2139/ssrn.1132368Suche in Google Scholar

Federal Reserve Board. 2023. “The Fed - Chart: Survey of Consumer Finances, 1989–2022.” https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scf/dataviz/scf/chart/#series:Education_Installment_Loans;demographic:all;population:1;units:mean (accessed November 2, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Federal Reserve Board. 2024. “Consumer Credit - G.19.” Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g19/HIST/cc_hist_memo_levels.html (accessed August 7, 2024).10.24149/wp2417Suche in Google Scholar

Foley, Michael, Z. Joyce Fan, Eddy Rauser, and Barbara Silverstein. 2012. “The Impact of Regulatory Enforcement and Consultation Visits on Workers’ Compensation Claims Incidence Rates and Costs, 1999–2008.” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 55 (11): 976–90. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22084.Suche in Google Scholar

Freeman, Jody, and Matthew C. Stephenson. 2023. “The Anti-democratic Major Questions Doctrine.” The Supreme Court Review 2022 (June): 1–48. https://doi.org/10.1086/724919.Suche in Google Scholar

From, Al. 2022. “The Challenge to Democracy – Overcoming the Small State Bias.” Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-challenge-to-democracy-overcoming-the-small-state-bias/ (accessed July 6, 2022).Suche in Google Scholar

Galanter, Marc. 1974. “Why the ‘Haves’ Come Out Ahead: Speculations on the Limits of Legal Change.” Law & Society Review 9 (1): 95–160. https://doi.org/10.2307/3053023.Suche in Google Scholar

Galvin, Daniel J. 2016. “Deterring Wage Theft: Alt-Labor, State Politics, and the Policy Determinants of Minimum Wage Compliance.” Perspectives on Politics 14 (2): 324–50. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592716000050.Suche in Google Scholar

Galvin, Daniel J. 2019. “From Labor Law to Employment Law: The Changing Politics of Workers’ Rights.” Studies in American Political Development 33 (1): 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X19000038.Suche in Google Scholar

Galvin, Daniel J., and Jacob S. Hacker. 2020. “The Political Effects of Policy Drift.” Studies in American Political Development 34 : 216–38. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0898588X2000005X.Suche in Google Scholar

Granovskiy, Boris, and Alexandra Hegji. 2019. “Education-Related Regulatory Flexibilities, Waivers, and Federal Assistance in Response to Disasters and National Emergencies.” CRS Report R42881. Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R42881.Suche in Google Scholar

Grisinger, Joanna L. 2012. The Unwieldy American State: Administrative Politics Since the New Deal. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139030373Suche in Google Scholar

Hacker, Jacob S. 2004. “Privatizing Risk without Privatizing the Welfare State: The Hidden Politics of Social Policy Retrenchment in the United States.” American Political Science Review 98 (2): 243–60. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055404001121.Suche in Google Scholar

Hacker, Jacob S. 2005. “Policy Drift: The Hidden Politics of US Welfare State Retrenchment.” In Beyond Continuity: Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies, edited by Wolfgang Streeck, and Kathleen Ann Thelen. Oxford University Press. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=c84SDAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR9&dq=Policy+drift:+The+hidden+politics+of+US+welfare+state+retrenchment&ots=UFIs_oUrZB&sig=WGENgN24tLi5de4mzQnY6q9HQ9A.Suche in Google Scholar

Hackett, Ursula. 2023. “Litigating Policy Drift: Frozen Categories and Thresholds in Court.” Perspectives on Politics 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1017/S153759272300292X.Suche in Google Scholar

Hasen, Richard L. 2019. “Polarization and the Judiciary.” Annual Review of Political Science 22 (1): 261–76. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-051317-125141.Suche in Google Scholar

Haviland, Amelia M., Rachel M. Burns, Wayne B. Gray, Teague Ruder, and John Mendeloff. 2012. “A New Estimate of the Impact of OSHA Inspections on Manufacturing Injury Rates, 1998–2005.” American Journal of Industrial Medicine 55 (11): 964–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22062.Suche in Google Scholar

Hlávka, Jakub, and Adam Rose. 2023. “COVID-19’s Total Cost to the U.S. Economy Will Reach $14 Trillion by End of 2023.” USC Schaeffer (blog). https://healthpolicy.usc.edu/article/covid-19s-total-cost-to-the-economy-in-us-will-reach-14-trillion-by-end-of-2023-new-research/ (accessed May 16, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Hollis-Brusky, Amanda. 2015. Ideas with Consequences: The Federalist Society and the Conservative Counterrevolution. New York: Oxford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Hollis-Brusky, Amanda, and Celia Parry. 2021. “‘In the Mold of Justice Scalia’: The Contours & Consequences of the Trump Judiciary.” The Forum 19 (1): 117–42. https://doi.org/10.1515/for-2021-0006.Suche in Google Scholar

Kanno-Youngs, Zolan. 2024. “Biden Chips Away at Student Loan Debt, Bit by Bit, amid High Expectations.” The New York Times, February 21, 2024, sec. U.S. https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/21/us/politics/biden-student-loan-forgiveness-debt.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Karol, David. 2019. Red, Green, and Blue: The Partisan Divide on Environmental Issues. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108673266Suche in Google Scholar

Kelley, William K. 2016. “Justice Scalia, the Nondelegation Doctrine, and Constitutional Argument Federal Courts, Practice & Procedure Symposium: Justice Scalia and the Federal Courts.” The Notre Dame Law Review 92 (5): 2107–28.Suche in Google Scholar

Kelly, Andrew S. 2016. “Boutique to Booming: Medicare Managed Care and the Private Path to Policy Change.” Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law 41 (3): 315–54. https://doi.org/10.1215/03616878-3523934.Suche in Google Scholar

Kintisch, Eli. 2011. “Was the Clean Air Act Intended to Cover CO2?” ScienceInsider. https://www.science.org/content/article/was-clean-air-act-intended-cover-co2 (accessed February 7, 2011).Suche in Google Scholar

Koger, Gregory. 2010. Filibustering: A Political History of Obstruction in the House and Senate. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226449661.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Krehbiel, Keith. 1998. Pivotal Politics: A Theory of U.S. Lawmaking. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226452739.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Larsen, Alli Orr. 2024. “Becoming a Doctrine.” Florida Law Review 76 (1). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4374736.Suche in Google Scholar

Lax, Jeffrey R. 2011. “The New Judicial Politics of Legal Doctrine.” Annual Review of Political Science 14 (1): 131–57. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.042108.134842.Suche in Google Scholar

Lazarus, Richard J. 2020. The Rule of Five: Making Climate History at the Supreme Court. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.10.4159/9780674245174Suche in Google Scholar

Lee, Frances E. 2015. “How Party Polarization Affects Governance.” Annual Review of Political Science 18 (1): 261–82. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-072012-113747.Suche in Google Scholar

Lee, Frances E. 2016. Insecure Majorities: Congress and the Perpetual Campaign. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.10.7208/chicago/9780226409184.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Levin, Ronald M. 2024. “The Major Questions Doctrine: Unfounded, Unbounded, and Confounded.” California Law Review 112. https://www.californialawreview.org/print/major-questions-critique.Suche in Google Scholar

Levine, David I., Michael W. Toffel, and Matthew S. Johnson. 2012. “Randomized Government Safety Inspections Reduce Worker Injuries with No Detectable Job Loss.” Science 336 (6083): 907–11. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1215191.Suche in Google Scholar

Libgober, Brian, and Daniel Carpenter. 2024. “Lawyers as Lobbyists: Regulatory Advocacy in American Finance.” Perspectives on Politics 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592723002943.Suche in Google Scholar

Lovell, George I. 2003. Legislative Deferrals: Statutory Ambiguity, Judicial Power, and American Democracy. New York: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

MacLaury, Judson. 1981. “The Job Safety Law of 1970: Its Passage Was Perilous.” Monthly Labor Review 104: 18.Suche in Google Scholar

Mahoney, James, and Kathleen Thelen. 2009. “A Theory of Gradual Institutional Change.” In Explaining Institutional Change: Ambiguity, Agency, and Power, edited by James Mahoney, and Kathleen Thelen, 1–37. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511806414.003Suche in Google Scholar

Maltzman, Forrest, James F. Spriggs, and Paul J. Wahlbeck. 2000. Crafting Law on the Supreme Court: The Collegial Game. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Marantz, Nicholas J. 2018. “Drift and Conversion in Metropolitan Governance: The Rise of California’s Redevelopment Agencies.” Journal of Urban Affairs 40 (7): 901–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2017.1421434.Suche in Google Scholar

Merrill, Thomas W. 2022. The Chevron Doctrine: Its Rise and Fall, and the Future of the Administrative State. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Mettler, Suzanne. 2016. “The Policyscape and the Challenges of Contemporary Politics to Policy Maintenance.” Perspectives on Politics 14 (2): 369–90. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592716000074.Suche in Google Scholar

Meyer, Timothy, and Ganesh Sitaraman. 2023. “The National Security Consequences of the Major Questions Doctrine.” Michigan Law Review 122.1: 55. https://doi.org/10.36644/mlr.122.1.national.Suche in Google Scholar

Miller, Jon D., Logan T. Woods, and Jason Kalmbach. 2022. “The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic in a Polarized Political System: Lessons from the 2020 Election.” Electoral Studies 80 (December): 102548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2022.102548.Suche in Google Scholar

Monast, Jonasj. 2016. “Major Questions about the Major Questions Doctrine.” Administrative Law Review 68 (3): 445–89.Suche in Google Scholar

Morris, Jim. 2015. After 44 Years, Halting Progress on Workplace Disease. Center for Public Integrity. http://publicintegrity.org/inequality-poverty-opportunity/workers-rights/worker-health-and-safety/unequal-risk/after-44-years-halting-progress-on-workplace-disease/ (accessed July 6, 2015).Suche in Google Scholar

Noble, Charles. 1986. Liberalism at Work: The Rise and Fall of OSHA. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Office of Legal Counsel. 2022. Use of the HEROES Act of 2003 to Cancel the Principal Amounts of Student Loans. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/olc/opinion/use-heroes-act-2003-cancel-principal-amounts-student-loans.Suche in Google Scholar

OSHA. n.d. “Regulations (Standards - 29 CFR): Standard Number 1910.” Occupational Safety and Health Administration. https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/regulations/standardnumber/1910 (accessed October 12, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Parenteau, Patrick. 2022. “The Inflation Reduction Act Doesn’t Get Around the Supreme Court’s Climate Ruling in West Virginia V. EPA, but it Does Strengthen EPA’s Future Abilities.” The Conversation (blog). http://theconversation.com/the-inflation-reduction-act-doesnt-get-around-the-supreme-courts-climate-ruling-in-west-virginia-v-epa-but-it-does-strengthen-epas-future-abilities-189279 (accessed August 24, 2022).Suche in Google Scholar

Rahman, K. Sabeel, and Kathleen Thelen. 2021. “The Role of the Law in the American Political Economy.” In The American Political Economy: Politics, Markets, and Power, edited by Alexander Hertel- Fernandez, Jacob S. Hacker, Kathleen Thelen, and Paul Pierson, 76–102. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Regan, Michael D. 2015. “Obama Vetoes GOP Attempt to Reverse Power Plant Regulations.” PBS NewsHour, December 19, 2015, sec. Politics. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/obama-vetoes-gop-bill-seeking-to-stop-clean-power-plan.Suche in Google Scholar

Ritchie, Hannah, Max Roser, and Pablo Rosado. 2020. “CO2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions.” Our World in Data, May. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions.Suche in Google Scholar

Ritter, Ling. 2023. “Elephants in Mouseholes: The Major Questions Doctrine in the Lower Courts.” SSRN Scholarly Paper. Rochester, NY. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4694666.Suche in Google Scholar

Rosner, David, and Gerald Markowitz. 2020. “A Short History of Occupational Safety and Health in the United States.” American Journal of Public Health 110 (5): 622–8. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2020.305581.Suche in Google Scholar

Saad, Lydia. 2019. “Preference for Environment over Economy Largest Since 2000.” Gallup.Com. (April 4, 2019). https://news.gallup.com/poll/248243/preference-environment-economy-largest-2000.aspx.Suche in Google Scholar

Sansevero, Christine. 1996. “The Effect of the Clean Air Act on Environmental Quality: Air Quality Trends Overview.” Pace Environmental Law Review 14 (1): 31–44. https://doi.org/10.58948/0738-6206.1363.Suche in Google Scholar

Segal, Jeffrey A., and Harold J. Spaeth. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615696Suche in Google Scholar

Segal, Jeffrey A., Harold J. Spaeth, and Sara C. Benesh. 2005. The Supreme Court in the American Legal System. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511614705Suche in Google Scholar

Seidenfeld, Mark, and Jim Rossi. 2000. “The False Promise of the New Nondelegation Doctrine Essay.” The Notre Dame Law Review 76 (1): 1–20.10.2139/ssrn.214508Suche in Google Scholar

Snead, Warren. 2023. “The Supreme Court as an Agent of Policy Drift: The Case of the NLRA.” American Political Science Review 117 (2): 661–74. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055422000685.Suche in Google Scholar

Snead, Warren. 2024. “The Supreme Court and the Allocation of Burden: Truncating the Voting Rights Act.” Law & Social Inquiry 49 (4): 1990–2020, https://doi.org/10.1017/lsi.2023.80.Suche in Google Scholar

Sobkowski, Patrick J. 2023. “Of Major Questions and Nondelegation.” Notice & Comment, Yale Journal on Regulation (blog). https://www.yalejreg.com/nc/of-major-questions-and-nondelegation-by-patrick-j-sobkowski/ (accessed July 3, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Sohoni, Mila. 2022. “The Major Questions Quartet.” Harvard Law Review 136: 262.Suche in Google Scholar

Songer, Donald R., A. Segal Jeffrey, and Charles M. Cameron. 1994. “The Hierarchy of Justice: Testing a Principal-Agent Model of Supreme Court-Circuit Court Interactions.” American Journal of Political Science 38 (3): 673–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/2111602.Suche in Google Scholar

Spitler, Eric J. 2023. “The Supreme Court’s Major Questions Doctrine: Implications for Responding to Financial Crises Articles & Remarks.” North Carolina Banking Institute 27: 1–62.10.1086/724919Suche in Google Scholar

Steele, Graham S. 2024. “Major Questions’ Quiet Crisis.” George Mason Law Review 31 (1): 265–339.Suche in Google Scholar

Swanson, Ana, and David Yaffe-Bellany. 2020. “Trump Declares Meat Supply ‘Critical,’ Aiming to Reopen Plants.” The New York Times. April 28, 2020, sec. Business. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/28/business/economy/coronavirus-trump-meat-food-supply.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Szymendera, Scott D. 2022. “Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA): COVID-19 Emergency Temporary Standards (ETS) on Health Care Employment and Vaccinations and Testing for Large Employers.” Congressional Research Service. CRS Report R46288. Congressional Research Service. https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46288.Suche in Google Scholar

Teles, Steven M. 2008. The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400829699Suche in Google Scholar

Terbeek, Calvin. 2021. “Clocks Must Always Be Turned Back’: Brown V. Board of Education and the Racial Origins of Constitutional Originalism.” American Political Science Review 115 (3): 821–34. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055421000095.Suche in Google Scholar

Tortorice, Marla D. 2019. “Nondelegation and the Major Questions Doctrine: Displacing Interpretive Power.” Buffalo Law Review 67 (4): 1075–132.Suche in Google Scholar

Tsang, Linda. 2017. “Clean Power Plan: Legal Background and Pending Litigation in West Virginia v. EPA.” CRS Report R44480. Congressional Research Service.Suche in Google Scholar

Turner, James Morton, and Andrew C. Isenberg. 2018. The Republican Reversal: Conservatives and the Environment from Nixon to Trump. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.10.2307/j.ctv24w64b0Suche in Google Scholar

Vietor, Tommy. 2024. “Republicans’ Work till You Die Agenda.” Pod Save America. https://crooked.com/podcast/republicans-work-till-you-die-agenda/.Suche in Google Scholar

Vladeck, Stephen. 2023. The Shadow Docket: How the Supreme Court Uses Stealth Rulings to Amass Power and Undermine the Republic. New York: Basic Books.Suche in Google Scholar

Warburton, Moira. 2024. “Why Congress Is Becoming Less Productive.” Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/graphics/USA-CONGRESS/PRODUCTIVITY/egpbabmkwvq/ (accessed March 12, 2024).Suche in Google Scholar

Warren, Elizabeth. 2020. “Congress Needs a Plan to Confront the Coronavirus. I Have One.” New York Times. April 8, 2020, sec. Opinion. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/opinion/coronavirus-congress-warren.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Wawro, Gregory John, and Eric Schickler. 2006. Filibuster: Obstruction and Lawmaking in the U.S. Senate. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Waxman, Henry A. 1991. “An Overview of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990.” Environmental Law 21 (4): 1721–816.Suche in Google Scholar

Webb, Erin. 2023. “More Major Questions Doctrine Decisions Are Coming.” Bloomberg Law. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/bloomberg-law-analysis/analysis-more-major-questions-doctrine-decisions-are-coming (accessed November 5, 2023).Suche in Google Scholar

Westerland, Chad, Jeffrey A. Segal, Lee Epstein, Charles M. Cameron, and Comparato Scott. 2010. “Strategic Defiance and Compliance in the U.S. Courts of Appeals.” American Journal of Political Science 54 (4): 891–905. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5907.2010.00465.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Wiseman, Alan E., and John R. Wright. 2022. “Chevron, State Farm, and the Impact of Judicial Doctrine on Bureaucratic Policymaking.” Perspectives on Politics 20 (3): 901–15. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592720003606.Suche in Google Scholar

Witko, Christopher. 2013. “Party Government and Variation in Corporate Influence on Agency Decision Making: OSHA Regulation, 1981–2006.” Social Science Quarterly 94 (4): 894–911. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12016.Suche in Google Scholar

Xu, Jiaquan, Shelly Murphy, Kenneth Kochanek, and Elizabeth Arias. 2022. Mortality in the United States, 2021. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. https://dx.doi.org/10.15620/cdc:122516.10.15620/cdc:122516Suche in Google Scholar

Yackee, Jason Webb, and Susan Webb Yackee. 2006. “A Bias towards Business? Assessing Interest Group Influence on the U.S. Bureaucracy.” The Journal of Politics 68 (1): 128–39. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2006.00375.x.Suche in Google Scholar

Zoppo, Avalon. 2023. “DC Circuit Grapples with ‘Major Questions Doctrine’ in Vehicle Emissions Case.” National Law Journal, September 15: 2023. https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2023/09/15/dc-circuit-grapples-with-major-questions-doctrine-in-vehicle-emissions-case/.Suche in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2025-01-28

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 7.12.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/for-2024-2016/html?lang=de
Button zum nach oben scrollen