Term Talk

Administrative Law. Chevron deference. In this extended edition of Term Talk, experts review the Supreme Court's administrative law decisions over the past few terms and analyze their impact on the regulatory state, to include the rejection of Chevron deference in Loper Bright v. Raimondo; the prohibition against imposing administrative penalties for fraud without a jury trial in SEC v. Jarkesy; and extending the statute of limitations under the Administrative Procedure Act in Corner Post v. FRB.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley School of Law; Michael McConnell, former Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, and Richard and Frances Mallery Professor of Law, Stanford Law School; and Beth Wiggins, Director of Research at the Federal Judicial Center.

Administrative Law. Chevron deference. In this extended edition of Term Talk, experts review the Supreme Court's administrative law decisions over the past few terms and analyze their impact on the regulatory state, to include the rejection of Chevron deference in Loper Bright v. Raimondo; the prohibition against imposing administrative penalties for fraud without a jury trial in SEC v. Jarkesy; and extending the statute of limitations under the Administrative Procedure Act in Corner Post v. FRB.

Participants. Erwin Chemerinsky, Dean and Jesse H. Choper Distinguished Professor of Law, University of California, Berkeley School of Law; Michael McConnell, former Judge for the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, and Richard and Frances Mallery Professor of Law, Stanford Law School; and Beth Wiggins, Director of Research at the Federal Judicial Center.

Preemption. NLRA. Experts discuss the aggravated imminent and foreseeable harm needed to remove unions from protection under the National Labor Relations Act and to allow actions in state courts to proceed.

Preemption. NLRA. Experts discuss the aggravated imminent and foreseeable harm needed to remove unions from protection under the National Labor Relations Act and to allow actions in state courts to proceed.

Dormant Commerce Clause. Experts discuss the reaffirmation of the Pike balancing test and express different interpretations of the Supreme Court’s treatment of extra-territoriality principles.

Dormant Commerce Clause. Experts discuss the reaffirmation of the Pike balancing test and express different interpretations of the Supreme Court’s treatment of extra-territoriality principles.

Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. United States. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. (link) Whether FSIA applies to criminal cases, and whether an immunity might be found in common law.

Pugin v. Garland. Immigration and Nationality Act. (link) The meaning of “related to obstruction of justice” in the context of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and whether the move away from the categorical approach in this context will be applied more generally

Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. v. United States. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. (link) Whether FSIA applies to criminal cases, and whether an immunity might be found in common law.

Pugin v. Garland. Immigration and Nationality Act. (link) The meaning of “related to obstruction of justice” in the context of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and whether the move away from the categorical approach in this context will be applied more generally.

Experts discuss the Supreme Court’s opinion in Smith v. United States which held that double jeopardy does not attach to trials conducted in the wrong venue.

In Samia v. United States, they analyze whether the use of a non-testifying co-defendant’s confession that implicates the other defendant violates the codefendant’s right to confront witnesses.

Finally, In Re Grand Jury, they discuss what the Court’s dismissal of the case after argument might mean to efforts to expand the scope of the attorney-client privilege.

Experts discuss the Supreme Court’s opinion in Smith v. United States which held that double jeopardy does not attach to trials conducted in the wrong venue.

In Samia v. United States, they analyze whether the use of a non-testifying co-defendant’s confession that implicates the other defendant violates the codefendant’s right to confront witnesses.

Finally, In Re Grand Jury, they discuss what the Court’s dismissal of the case after argument might mean to efforts to expand the scope of the attorney-client privilege.