Administrative Law from the Inside Out: Essays on Themes in the Work of Jerry L. Mashaw

After a number of weekends I have finished reading  a very informative book edited by Professor Parrillo of  Yale University on the works of an administrative law legend, Professor Mashaw.

Unfortunately we often read articles from the perspective of issues we are  working on, in this instance centralized regulatory review and the Data Quality Act.

The text states in a very concise manner a point central to both of the aforementioned subjects:

“The dominant concerns of federal administrative law as an academic field, from at least the 1930s through to the present, have been: (a) how Congress delegates power to agencies through statutes; and (b) how federal courts control an agency’s actions through lawsuits, usually to ensure conformity with a congressional statute.”

The Impact of Public Citizen on Federal Regulatory Policy

Last evening I had the good fortune of being invited and attending the annual reception of Public Citizen. During the course of the event a number of discussions centered around the Old Washington, when we accorded those who differed with our position the respect they deserved. Notwithstanding our occasional differences on federal regulatory policy I recounted the enormous impact the organization had on public policy.

Most noteworthy was the Public Citizen’s work to convince the Supreme Court to overturn the one-house veto of regulations in the Chadha Decision. The decision was of far reaching impact because during my tenure as a career federal employee the one-house veto of regulations vested  Congressional committee staff with an enormous power to influence the content of federal rulemakings. The intervention of Public Citizen brought this toxic practice to an end.

From Lawfare– Case Closed: The Justice Department Won’t Stand Behind Its Report on Immigrants and Terrorism

Editor’s Note: Case Closed, really?  It should be noted  that notwithstanding the precedent-setting accomplishments of the plaintiffs that five years hence the report will continue  to  be available in its uncorrected form on the DoJ website unless the plaintiffs file for judicial relief. [ CRE has not reviewed the report in detail and consequently is addressing this matter solely as a procedural–not a substantive– issue under the Data (Information) Quality Act; CRE’s interest is in demonstrating that a court can review the denial of a DQA petition ].