Location:
Projects:
The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) is pleased to announce a public forum, Recent Administrative Law Developments in the Supreme Court: What’s Next for Agencies? Across four virtual panels beginning next Tuesday, July 30, ACUS members and researchers will discuss the significance of recent Supreme Court decisions for federal agencies.
Register for all panels here.
Panel 1: Loper Bright v. Raimondo
Tuesday, July 30 (12:00 p.m. – 1:15 p.m. ET)
The first panel will address Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. In Loper Bright, the Supreme Court “overruled” Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council and held that the Administrative Procedure Act “incorporates the traditional understanding of the judicial function, under which courts must exercise independent judgment in determining the meaning of statutory provisions.”
Participants:
- Jack Beermann, Boston University School of Law
- Abbe Gluck, Yale Law School and Yale Medical School
- Elbert Lin, Hunton Andrew Kurth LLP
- Victoria Nourse, Georgetown University Law Center
Moderator:
- Cary Coglianese, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Panel 2: SEC v. Jarkesy
Tuesday, July 30 (1:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. ET)
The second panel will address Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy. In Jarkesy, the Supreme Court held that “the Seventh Amendment entitles a defendant to a jury trial when the SEC seeks civil penalties against him for securities fraud.”
Participants:
- Jennifer Dickey, U.S. Chamber Litigation Center
- Jeffrey Lubbers, American University Washington College of Law
- Christopher Walker, University of Michigan Law School
Moderator:
- Matthew Wiener, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School
Panel 3: Corner Post v. Federal Reserve
Thursday, August 1 (12:00 p.m. – 1:15 p.m. ET)
The third panel will address Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. In Corner Post, the Court held the statute of limitations for challenging an agency rule under the Administrative Procedure Act does not begin to run until a plaintiff is “injured” by the rule.
Participants:
- Aditya Bamzai, University of Virginia School of Law
- John Duffy, University of Virginia School of Law
- Jonathan Siegel, The George Washington University Law School
- Allison Zieve, Public Citizen
Moderator:
- Elizabeth Papez, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Panel 4: Ohio v. EPA
The fourth panel will address Ohio v. Environmental Protection Agency. In this decision, the Supreme Court granted plaintiffs’ application to stay an EPA rule pending appeal based on a finding that EPA “offered no reasoned response” to certain public comments made during the notice-and-comment period.
Details about Panel 4, including the time and participants, will be announced soon.