Supreme Court schedules oral argument in three cases related to the administrative state
Thursday’s Brew updated readers on the Supreme Court’s 2019-20 term, highlighting cases scheduled for oral argument during December, January, and February. Three cases the court will hear in the first week of March are of particular interest to those who study the administrative state.
I asked our team for a brief summary. After all, these are complicated court cases. You can see their reply below, with links for more details and background.
Department of Homeland Security v. Thuraissigiam
This case—scheduled for March 2—asks whether asylum seekers may challenge in court procedures immigration officials used to deny their asylum applications.
Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
This case, along with Liu v. Securities and Exchange Commission, is scheduled for oral argument March 3. It concerns whether Congress’ decision to give substantial executive authority to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)—an agency led by a single, Senate-confirmed director the president may not remove at-will—violates separation of powers principles.
Liu v. Securities and Exchange Commission
At issue in this case is whether the Supreme Court might limit how the Securities and Exchange Commission and other administrative agencies can penalize people who violate regulations.
Our monthly newsletter on the administrative state—The Checks and Balances Letter—covers cases like these, as well as laws and administrative decisions affecting regulatory activity at both the federal and state level. Click the link below to subscribe or explore past issues!
Learn more→
|