The Supreme Court’s most recent term was one of significance with respect to the separation of powers. The Court held that the President is immune from criminal prosecution for most official acts. The Court also overturned the Chevron doctrine in Loper Bright v. Raimondo and determined that administrative agencies typically cannot impose civil penalties against individuals without a jury trial in SEC v. Jarkesy. These cases followed not long after the Supreme Court’s express recognition of the major-questions doctrine in West Virginia v. EPA. Yet the Supreme Court also upheld the CFPB’s novel funding method in the face of an Appropriation Clause challenge, issued an important opinion bearing on facial challenges in Moody v. NetChoice, and rejected a petition asking that it reconsider the nondelegation doctrine. What is driving these decisions—originalism, history, or pragmatic concerns? What issues might be ripe for further development or reexamination—nondelegation, removal restrictions on officers, the major questions doctrine, or something else? And how should advocates think about separation of powers challenges moving forward, in the context of both strategic and corporate litigation?
Featuring

Mr. Russell Balikian, Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
Ms. Zhonette Brown, General Counsel and Senior Litigation Counsel, New Civil Liberties Alliance
Mr. Roman Martinez, Partner, Latham & Watkins LLP
Mr. Luke McCloud, Partner, Williams & Connolly
Moderator: Hon. Daniel Bress, Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit