A Hard Look

On this episode of A Hard Look, we’re discussing the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright; the case that overruled the infamous Chevron Doctrine. Since last summer, there has been meaningful legal developments within lower circuits. Professor of Law and legal scholar, Cary Coglianese, joins us to discuss what—if any—indications these decisions mean for a post-Loper Bright landscape.(*)* Editorial Note: At the time of recording, this episode referred to the article Professor Coglianese wrote with Professor Daniel E. Walters, “The Great Unsettling: Administrative Governance After Loper Bright,” as “forthcoming.” This article has since been published and is now available online at the adminstrativelawreview.org.The transcript of the episode can be found here or on our website. Show Notes:Listen to our pre-Loper Bright episode, where we interviewed Daniel M. Sullivan to discuss the critiques and weaknesses of Chevron doctrine, potential constitutional problems with judicial review of agency decisions, and what administrative law may look like after the decision. Read more:Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo on SCOTUS BlogLoper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and the Future of Agency Interpretations of Law by Congressional Research Service (Dec. 31, 2024)The Great Unsettling: Administrative Governance After Loper Bright by Cary Coglianese & Daniel E. Walters

A Hard Look, a podcast by the Administrative Law Review, covers recent events in administrative law, regulatory policy, and the critiques and praise of various regulations and their efficacy. This season, stand by for our new series: A Quick Look and A Hard Look at What's to Come, in addition to our traditional A Hard Look episodes! If you have any questions about the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

In this Episode of A Hard Look, ALR Senior Technology Editor, Bennett J. Nuss interviews Professor James Ridgway about the practical effects of an ambiguous ambiguity doctrine as promulgated by Chevron, using Veteran’s Law as a case example. This discussion ranges from a discussion of the history of Veterans Law, a critical examination of the motivators within administrative agencies which may contribute to ineffectiveness and court challenges, and theorizing about how iterative learning may improve agency rulemaking. This episode was produced by ALR Technology Editor Anthony Aviza. --- Recommended Reading: This Episode’s TranscriptJ.B. Rule and James Salzman, Mozart and the Red Queen: The Problem of Regulatory Accretion in the Administrative State. Kent Barnett and Christopher J. Walker, Chevron in the Circuit Courts If a military veteran you know is in need of assistance, you can find Vet Centers for Readjustment Counseling as well as information regarding benefits at www.va.gov.

On this Episode of A Hard Look, ALR Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews Holwell, Shuster & Goldberg Partner Daniel M. Sullivan regarding the controversial Supreme Court case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which has the potential to completely overhaul Administrative Law as we know it. The discussion ranges from the critiques and weaknesses of Chevron doctrine, potential constitutional problems with judicial review of agency decisions, and what administrative law may look like after this groundbreaking term. --- This episode was produced by ALR Technology Editor, Anthony Aviza. Many thanks to ALR Editor-in-Chief Madison Gestiehr for her help in providing transcription for this episode. If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu Recommended Reading: Chevron v. NRDC Marbury v. Madison Amicus and Filings for Loper Bright Transcript

In this episode of A Hard Look, Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews current Washington College of Law 3L and Senior Articles Editor Mehraz Rahman regarding her comment published in ALR Volume 75.3. In this episode, we review the ongoing controversies surrounding Title IX sexual misconduct adjudication on college campuses, and how standards for holding these adjudications have changed from administration to administration over the course of the past decade. Then we turn our attention to how this process can be formalized and reformed to better serve the interests of victims, accused, and the substantial interests of justice and due process implicated in these hearings. --- This Episode was produced by Administrative Law Review Technology Editor Anthony Aviza. If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu --- If you believe you have been a victim of sexual violence, you can use the recourses below to find help: For AU Students, please contact the Office of Equity and Title IX. For Non-Students: National Sexual Assault Hotline with Confidential 24/7 Support: 1-800-656-4673 Campus Sexual Violence Recourse List --- Recommended Reading Mehraz’s Comment (TBP) This Episode's Transcript 2011 Dear Colleague Letter 2014 Q&A Withdrawal of the 2011 DCL & 2014 Q&A Summary of Major Provisions of the Department of Education’s Title IX Final Rule under the Trump Administration U.S. Department of Education’s 2022 Proposed Amendments to Title IX Regulations

On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to Steven Valentino speak with Professor John Brooks. In this episode, Professor Brooks discusses how the congressional budget process and regulatory action by administration makes the student loan crisis a complicated issue. He discusses how legislators through the budget process can use their tools to craft policy in the student loan space, and also how the Executive can use its tools to create policy on this subject. If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to Steven Valentino and guest host Edward Leaf speak with Jason Schwartz, Administrative Law Review alum and partner at Fried Frank. In this two-part series on cryptocurrency, this first episode focuses on the basics of how cryptocurrencies and digital assets work. The group also explores President Biden’s recent Executive Order calling on agencies to explore these digital assets. If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Steven Valentino at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

Today’s episode of  A Hard Look  is the third in a series of four episodes that will examine the role that racism has historically played in Administrative Law, the ways that racism still actively pervades the Administrative Law Space, and the ways that practitioners, leaders, scholars, and our listeners can effectuate change. Each episode will be hosted by a different student on the Administrative Law Review and feature guests from across the country. On this episode, host Brendon and guests, Dean Kevin Johnson and Professor Carrie Rosenbaum, discuss how immigration law, administrative law, and racism have historically intersected in several major Supreme Court cases on immigration. The guests also talk about the use of critical race theory in immigration academia, some of the barriers to immigration reform, and the recent Supreme Court decision in Department of Homeland Security vs. Board of Regents of the University of California.  Professor Carrie Rosenbaum authored "UnEqual Protection in Immigration Law" for the Yale Journal of Regulation.  The series was inspired by the Yale Journal of Regulation’s Symposium on Racism in Administrative Law. A special “Thank You” to all of the hosts and guests that participated and to Professor Kathryn Kovacs for spearheading the Symposium and for getting this conversation started.