Author Archives: Joel Nolette
Introduction It should come as no surprise given the size of the United States Code, but every now and again two federal statutes point crossways. Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis presents the Court with one such conflict between the Federal Arbitration Act on the one hand and the National Labor Relations Act on the other. […]
I have a very immodest proposal: let’s flip the presumption of Auer deference so that the regulated party, rather than the regulatory agency, gets the benefit of any ambiguity in a regulation? We’ll start here, but it should be noted for the record that the same logic extends to Chevron deference also. Think about it. In contracts, this […]
On September 13, 1810, William Cushing passed away in Scituate, MA. Cushing had served his nation in a number of important and prestigious roles: Chief Justice on the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts during the Revolution, one of the six original Associate Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States (where he served for […]
So, selling ironic coffee mugs generated a hair over $130 as of August 14, 2017. It just so happened that a project on DonorSee was $130 shy of its funding goal. How fitting, then, to start this new endeavor: Amos has Cerebral Palsy. He is 3 years old but weighs only 5kg. His Dad died […]
Regular readers may recall an essay I posted a few months back, which I wrote for the Pacific Legal Foundation’s law student writing competition. In that essay, I discussed the administrative law doctrine known as Auer (or Seminole Rock) deference, and I highlighted recent calls for reconsidering or abrogating the doctrine. As I stated there: […]
[Welcome to The Weekly Bipartisan, where we share instances of meaningful bipartisanship, on the Hill and elsewhere. This project seeks to shine a light on efforts to come together to find common ground and advance shared values in a political climate defined by polarization, an increasingly jaded citizenry, and vilification instead of constructive dialogue and debate. […]
Yesterday marked the end of the Court’s October Term 2016, meaning the last few cases yet to be decided were announced and various pending matters were otherwise disposed of (deets on that can be found here and other forthcoming summaries). It was a pretty typical end-of-term day, what with big cases granted cert for argument next term, an interesting constitutional decision announced, and the commentariat atwitter just trying to keep up.