Come for the CLE, stay for the admin law enlightenment.

Really interesting from @donmoyn.bsky.social: the ball is up in the air in the court of public opinion when it comes to the value of independence in administration. Lots of tactical implications of this for our politics. open.substack.com/pub/donmoyni...

This is very encouraging.

Remarkable that just a year out from Loper Bright you have judges who were previously Chevron critics beginning opinions this way. media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/doc...

I've just been alerted to a "symposium" that is going on over at the Yale J on Reg Notice & Comment blog that seems designed to lend an air of legitimacy to some very extreme ideas about how admin law doesn't apply to deregulation. Surprised they're running this. www.yalejreg.com/nc/foreword-...

A huge part of the problem is that we only hear from the partisan political appointees. There are many reasons why, but the vast majority of people have no idea what agency staff do and why their work is important. Michael Lewis has done a stellar job of highlighting this work, but it's rare.

We've long seen this kind of contingent partisan evaluation of other institutions, but as far as I know this is some of the first real evidence of it when it comes to administrative agencies. It makes sense: people could perhaps be forgiven for thinking that agencies just are the President.

I'll add that what Nelson is saying here is completely unoriginal. SCOTUS has barreled ahead with the unitary executive theory DESPITE a surfeit of evidence rebutting it, and all Nelson does here is (finally) acknowledge that fact.

Somehow I missed this piece from Kate Andrias the other day, but she absolutely nails it. "Our Constitution is not dying. It is waiting — waiting for us to claim it."

🔥

I'm old enough to remember when the talk of the town was how the libertarian wing of the GOP had seen the light and was working to deconstruct the politics of the "war on crime." Don't hear much about that anymore.

Maybe I'm missing something about Danielle Allen's pitch to lean into the higher ed compact shakedown, but couldn't higher ed collaborate without the Trump admin? And so what would be the benefit of engaging Trump on his terms? Optics with Trump supporters? Are they ever going to support higher ed?

Our Center on the Structural Constitution, led by @crockeroncourts.bsky.social and Neil Siegel, has organized an amazing symposium with the Harvard Law Review on the politics and law of judicial review. And the best news is that you can attend online! harvardlawreview.org/judicial-rev...

What I hear is a person who has no competence in anything other than performative grievance trying to distract us from that fact.

It is not remarked upon enough that many of the SCOTUS justices spent years peddling hysterics about agencies having an unfair advantage in litigation, and now that their preferred party firmly controls them, agencies can seemingly do no wrong.

This is a bluff, and not a particularly good one. As we've seen, layoffs can be challenged and workers can be reinstated. I hope the Democrats are not tricked by this empty threat. www.washingtonpost.com/business/202...

Honestly, I'm not sure it makes much difference whether Humphrey's is overturned sub silentio on the shadow docket. It's not like a single good argument will be concocted while we wait for the merits. And it will be that much easier to restore agency independence in the future using this device.

We all know how this will play out. We can never forget the role SCOTUS played in ending the rule of law.

Wow. I hope he uses his newfound freedom to say what he really thinks about the assault on academic freedom here, and I really hope it isn't that "this is about academic responsibility, not academic freedom," because that didn't really do much for anybody. www.texastribune.org/2025/09/18/t...

What a cool diagram from @jamesgoodwin.bsky.social and @progressivereform.bsky.social showing the changes from the Fall 2024 Unified Agenda to the (recently issued) Spring 2025 Unified Agenda. progressivereform.org/cpr-blog/tru...

"He seemed perversely unaware that those accursed unelected officials downtown are now our unelected officials."

This just goes to show you that there isn't an end in sight to the censorship once you open that door.

All I see in this video is a student disrupting class on a subject that is still well within academic freedom. Sad to see that my University is being attacked by opportunists and zealots and that we appear to be caving. We know caving won't stop them. share.google/pfb4Hjak0F9X...

Kavanaugh is getting an earful right now, which means we will soon be hearing about respect for the Court. These jusices, man--they just are not ready for the responsibility they have. Going forward, this needs to be part of the vetting process for all SCOTUS nominees: Can you handle criticism?

Here's a fun thought experiment: substitute the parties to this case out for the EPA and businesses subject to regulatory enforcement (a la Sackett). I submit it's completely unimaginable that Kavanaugh would write anything like his concurrence here. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...

You could say that our collective ability to turn things that are not actually unpopular into wedge issues in partisan politics and subject them to continual unpopular referenda is the defining feature of our society right now. Widespread ignorance of the center of gravity on issue after issue.

Government by shakedown. www.nytimes.com/2025/09/07/w...

One of the greatest errors in K-12 education, in my opinion, is prioritizing trigonometry and calculus over statistics. Yes, trig and calc are important for many professions. Statistics are important for literacy.

Just because you don't pay doesn't mean you don't pay.

Omg, perfect post.

Drop a like to add your thanks to the BLS staff who put together the jobs numbers. They've done so yet again this month, despite the arbitrary firing of their boss, uninformed social media insults, and the prospect of being led by an unqualified ideologue. Thank you BLS-ers!

In truth, though, the President does have more power to do this than most of us do by virtue of his power to speak as the President. The reality is that the Trump admin is showing us how it's possible to use voice to push massive change, and it won't stop him to say he has no "authority."

Honestly, we should just be grateful Trump hasn't decided to slap his name and a ™ on every agency.

This argument (let me do the illegal thing because paying people back would take me back to square one) is truly stupid, but I'm not gonna lie--it probably will work with the Supreme Court. www.nytimes.com/2025/09/03/u...

These seem like extremely strong arguments to me. And they are only strengthened by the fact that reading the authorities any other way would open the door to civil wars. Like, that cannot be an option.

To be clear, saying something to the effect of "I apologize if you misunderstood what I was up to" is not an apology. It's actually kind of a dig.

This is a stunningly great paper by @nwdonahue.bsky.social papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....

I have a slightly different perspective: admin law is cyclical. We don't ever fully settle on anything because it can't be settled and is inherently politically unstable. One reason you fight the last war is to reveal the excesses of a myopic pseudoresolution of core tensions in the field.

I wrote for the @nytimes.com about the administration’s abandonment of statistics and data in favor of information as an instrument of raw control

If I'm ever this shameless just put me down

He's literally become Don Quixote.

Something is turning right now. The militarization of completely normal cities on pretext, the attack on the foundations of the economy, the exhibitionist persecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia in the face of courts. It feels like Trump is going for it... Which, of course, we all knew he would.

For those unfamiliar with this article, methinks it is about to become extremely important in the litigation over Cook's firing. www.columbialawreview.org/wp-content/u...

All I can think about is how bad Chief Justice Roberts has gotten played...and by Trump of all people. It's like he never learned about the law and the "bad man."

There's just no serious argument that these things are good, as evidenced by Cato sounding the alarm. The biggest question in the world right now is how soon a distracted public will figure out that it matters for them more than grievance symbolism. www.nytimes.com/2025/08/22/b...

I think about this a lot. It's the scary part of Timur Kuran's idea of "preference falsification." The positive part is that if private truths are democratic, the authoritarian's hold on power can unravel quickly. All depends on the distribution of private truths. www.google.com/books/editio...

Among other things, claiming that the people of Chicago are clamoring for a militarized takeover of their city and its democratically elected leaders is the kind of thing that would get you involuntarily committed or put in a conservatorship if everybody around you had your best interest in mind.

It would be very cool if people who a) like the idea of free online tax filing that is not a bait-and-switch from a private vendor and b) support an innovative tool that users loved, would respond to these surveys. donmoynihan.substack.com/p/the-death-...

Bingo. And, beyond embarrassment, they'd make law that would be decidedly inconvenient for them whenever a Democratic administration returns. This is about preserving discretion for themselves.