Michael Ramsey’s Originalist Defense of the Major Questions Doctrine

Adam White and Jace Lington chat with Law Professor Michael D. Ramsey about how originalists can defend the major questions doctrine as a substantive canon of interpretation. He examines post-ratification court practice and other substantive canons designed by judges to minimize the harms of judicial error when interpreting ambiguous statutes. Ramsey recently presented a paper on this subject at a Gray Center research roundtable.

Notes:

• An Originalist Defense of the Major Questions Doctrine, Michael D. Ramsey
• The Major Questions Doctrine: Right Diagnosis, Wrong Remedy, Thomas W. Merrill
• The Ghosts of Chevron Present and Future, Gary S. Lawson
• Biden v. Nebraska: The New State Standing and the (Old) Purposive Major Questions Doctrine, Jed Handelsman Shugerman
• The Major Answers Doctrine, Lisa Heinzerling
• The New Purpose and Intent in Major Questions Cases, Anita S. Krishnakumar
• The Major Questions Doctrine: Unfounded, Unbounded, and Confounded, Ronald M. Levin
• The Minor Questions Doctrine, Aaron L. Nielson
• The Major Questions Doctrine Outside Chevron‘s Domain, Adam R.F. Gustafson