Join us.

We’re working to create a just society and preserve a healthy environment for future generations. Donate today to help.

Donate

New Amicus Supports Challenge to Trump’s ‘Two-for-One’ Order

Yesterday, ten distinguished law professors, all of them CPR Member Scholars writing in their individual capacities, filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit brought by Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the Communication Workers of America challenging as illegal and unconstitutional the Trump administration’s Executive Order 13771. The order requires agencies to identify at least two existing rules to repeal for every new one they seek to issue and to ensure that the money companies would save by not having to comply with the two health, safety, environmental, or other regulations would fully offset the compliance costs associated with the new rule.

The goal of the amicus brief is to further elucidate the “fundamental principles of administrative law and policy” that undergird the legal arguments raised in the lawsuit. To do this, it traces in painstaking detail the history of U.S. administrative law in general, and of regulations in particular, back to the founding. Along the way, the brief demonstrates that the pursuit of the public good has always served as the animating force behind administrative law. In recent decades, Congress has carried on this tradition by enacting such landmark legislation as the Clean Water Act and the Consumer Product Safety Act, and directed federal agencies to enforce their provisions through the issuance of specific regulations, the purpose of which are to deliver concrete public benefits.

According to the brief, Executive Order 13771 and supporting guidance are directly at odds with the fundamental principles and policy considerations that have been at the heart of our system of administrative law and regulatory system for more than two centuries. This drastic departure from established practices and norms only further underscores the degree to which the order contravenes applicable statutory and constitutional requirements.

The lead authors of the brief are Joseph Tomain and Amy Sinden. They’re joined by co-signers Victor Flatt, Alyson Flournoy, Robert Glicksman, Thomas McGarity, Sidney Shapiro, Karen Sokol, Rena Steinzor, and Robert Verchick.  

Showing 2,818 results

James Goodwin | May 25, 2017

New Amicus Supports Challenge to Trump’s ‘Two-for-One’ Order

Yesterday, ten distinguished law professors, all of them CPR Member Scholars writing in their individual capacities, filed an amicus brief in support of a lawsuit brought by Public Citizen, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and the Communication Workers of America challenging as illegal and unconstitutional the Trump administration’s Executive Order 13771. The order requires agencies […]

Daniel Farber | May 24, 2017

Whither WOTUS?

President Trump ordered EPA and the Army Corps to review the Obama Administration’s Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule, which sets expansive bounds on federal jurisdiction over water bodies and wetlands. The agencies have sent the White House a proposal to rescind the WOTUS rule and revert to earlier rules until they can come up […]

Matt Shudtz | May 23, 2017

The Depraved Indifference of Hollow Government

From the safety of Air Force One en route from Tel Aviv to Rome, President Trump dropped his FY 2018 budget on Washington, D.C., and sent OMB Director Mick Mulvaney to run point on the ground. They like to talk about it as a “hard power” budget. What they don’t like to talk about are […]

William Funk | May 22, 2017

Requiring Formal Rulemaking Is a Thinly Veiled Attempt to Halt Regulation

Originally published on The Regulatory Review by CPR Member Scholar William Funk. Professor Kent Barnett recently opined in The Regulatory Review that formal rulemaking really is not that bad and may actually be a good thing in certain circumstances. His argument deserves closer review because the proposed Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA) would require the equivalent of formal […]

James Goodwin | May 16, 2017

Ahead of Markup, CPR Member Scholars Voice Concerns over the Senate Regulatory Accountability Act

Today, 27 Member Scholars of the Center for Progressive Reform, leading academics who specialize in administrative law and regulatory policy, submitted a letter to Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Ron Johnson and Ranking Member Claire McCaskill outlining their serious concerns with the Senate Regulatory Accountability Act. That bill is among several aimed […]

Matthew Freeman | May 15, 2017

CPR Scholars’ Recent Op-Eds

CPR Member Scholars continue to make their voices heard on the nation’s opinion pages. You can always review the latest and greatest pieces on our op-eds page, but here’s a roundup from the last few weeks to save you a couple clicks. Two CPR Member Scholars had pieces in The American Prospect in mid-April. Tom […]

Daniel Farber | May 12, 2017

Thinking Globally, Acting Transnationally

The U.S. government obviously isn’t going to be taking a global leadership role regarding climate change, not for the next four years. At one time, that would have been the end of the story: the only way to accomplish anything internationally was through national governments. But we live in a different world today, and there […]

David Hunter | May 5, 2017

Trump’s Fossil Fuel Dream Team Faces Climate Change’s Checks and Balances

Due to the blinders of his fossil fuel dream team and the industry’s myths denying climate change (#ExxonKnew), President Donald Trump seems once again on the verge of withdrawing from the Paris climate change accord. That’s a fool’s errand. Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement would be a major blow to U.S. standing and leadership in […]

Sandra Zellmer | May 4, 2017

Trump’s Plan to Dismantle National Monuments Comes with Steep Cultural and Ecological Costs

Professors Michelle Bryan and Monte Mills of the University of Montana co-authored this article with Center for Progressive Reform Member Scholar and University of Nebraska—Lincoln Professor Sandra Zellmer. It originally appeared in The Conversation on May 3, 2017. In the few days since President Trump issued his Executive Order on National Monuments, many legal scholars […]