Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
[4] [5] Legislation is produced by elected officials, but is implemented by unelected bureaucrats, who sometimes act under their own preferences or interests. [1] [2] [6] Bureaucratic drift is often treated as a principal–agent problem, with Congress and the Presidency acting as principals and bureaucracy acting as the agent. The government ...
Typically, courts provide clarity. They do not exist to make or enforce law but rather interpret what the law says. Nothing more, nothing less. But a week of tumultuous rulings in Montana has, in ...
Administrative law can help these agencies get on the path of following regulations, serve the public, and in turn, a reflection of the public's values and beliefs. There is a need for administrative law because the interest of public could be at risk if various agencies were not following laws and regulations.
Alexander Bickel, a law professor at Yale Law School, coined the term counter-majoritarian difficulty in his 1962 book, The Least Dangerous Branch.He used the term to describe the argument that judicial review is illegitimate because it allows unelected judges to overrule the lawmaking of elected representatives and thus to undermine the will of the majority.
Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1997), is a United States Supreme Court case that concerns the standard that the Court should apply when it reviews an executive department's interpretation of regulations established under federal legislation.
President-elect Donald Trump has said he might install his picks for top administration posts without first winning approval in the U.S. Senate. This would erode the power of Congress and remove a ...
In administrative law, rulemaking is the process that executive and independent agencies use to create, or promulgate, regulations.In general, legislatures first set broad policy mandates by passing statutes, then agencies create more detailed regulations through rulemaking.
The concept of rational basis review can be traced to an influential 1893 article, "The Origin and Scope of American Constitutional Law", by Harvard law professor James Bradley Thayer. Thayer argued that statutes should be invalidated only if their unconstitutionality is "so clear that it is not open to rational question". [ 12 ]