On November 15, 2019, the Gray Center hosted a public policy conference on “Technology, Innovation, and Regulation.” For this conference, scholars wrote and presented papers on the way regulation affects technological innovation, and vice-versa. The Gray Center convened expert panels on topics including whether social media should be regulated for “neutrality,” “regulatory sandboxes” and other laboratories of democracy, artificial intelligence and the future of regulation, and disruptive technology and the future of “law,” during which the new research was discussed. Keynote remarks were given by Kate Lauer, an Advisor for Jiko and former Head of Global Regulatory Strategy for PayPal.

The first panel examined whether social media should be regulated for “neutrality,” and focused on a paper by Michigan State University College of Law’s Adam Candeub on “Common Carriage and Section 230.” He was joined in the discussion by Georgetown Law’s Anupam Chander, Facebook’s Lori Moylan, and the Mercatus Center’s Adam Thierer. The panel was moderated by the Gray Center’s then-Deputy Director, Andrew Kloster. The paper and videos are available at: https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/technology-innovation-and-regulation/.

More

For nearly a century, one of the most contentious issues in the Administrative State has been agency “adjudication” — that is, the power of agencies to adjudicate disputes among private parties, or disputes between private parties and the government. But what if a century’s debate has actually caused us to forget what the issues really are?

In the new issue of the Harvard Law Review, Professor William Baude brings us back to first principles on the question of “Adjudication Outside Article III.” Describing the task as “a sympathetic recreation of historical practice,” Professor Baude explains what the Constitution’s provision for “the Judicial Power of the United States” means for territorial courts, for quasi-“court” tribunals like the Bankruptcy Court, and ultimately for the agencies’ own “adjudications.”

More

On October 25, 2019, the Gray Center hosted “The Administration of Immigration.” For this conference, the Gray Center invited scholars to write papers exploring ways to improve our nation’s immigration system, and discuss them alongside other experts in panel sessions addressing such topics as whether immigration law is special, the costs and benefits of immigration, judicial review of the immigration system, and the moral underpinnings of immigration law. The event also featured keynote remarks from James McHenry, Director of the Executive Office of Immigration Review at the United States Department of Justice.

The fourth and final panel looked at the role of judicial review in immigration law. The discussion centered around two new papers. The first was “Chevron‘s Asylum: Re-Assessing Deference in Refugee Cases,” by Michael Kagan of the University of Nevada Las Vegas, and the second was “Recalibrating Judicial Review in Immigration Adjudication,” by Christopher Walker of the Ohio State University. The panel was moderated by the Gray Center’s Executive Director, Adam White. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-immigration/.

More

On October 25, 2019, the Gray Center hosted “The Administration of Immigration.” For this conference, the Gray Center invited scholars to write papers exploring ways to improve our nation’s immigration system, and discuss them alongside other experts in panel sessions addressing such topics as whether immigration law is special, the costs and benefits of immigration, judicial review of the immigration system, and the moral underpinnings of immigration law. The event also featured keynote remarks from James McHenry, Director of the Executive Office of Immigration Review at the United States Department of Justice.

The third panel looked at costs of the U.S. immigration system. The discussion centered around two new working papers: First, “Silence and the Second Wall” by panelists Ming Hsu Chen of the University of Colorado Boulder’s Colorado Law School and Zachary R. New of Joseph & Hall P.C. The second paper, “A Seat at the Table for Citizens: Why the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Applies to Immigration and How Best to Implement this Long Overdue Reform” was authored by Julie Axelrod of the Center for Immigration Studies. The Gray Center’s Executive Director, Adam White, joined the panel to comment on the papers, and it was moderated by the Gray Center’s then-Deputy Director, Andrew Kloster. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-immigration/.

More

On October 25, 2019, the Gray Center hosted “The Administration of Immigration.” For this conference, the Gray Center invited scholars to write papers exploring ways to improve our nation’s immigration system, and discuss them alongside other experts in panel sessions addressing such topics as whether immigration law is special, the costs and benefits of immigration, judicial review of the immigration system, and the moral underpinnings of immigration law. The event also featured keynote remarks from James McHenry, Director of the Executive Office of Immigration Review at the United States Department of Justice.

In this presentation, McHenry describes the work of the Office of Immigration Review and places it into the context of the broader discussions we had on immigration law and policy. The video is available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-immigration/.

More

Does the Constitution set limits on the powers that Congress authorizes agencies to exercise? Last year, in Gundy v. United States, Justice Gorsuch issued a dissenting opinion calling for a reinvigorated “nondelegation doctrine.” He was joined by Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas. Gorsuch’s dissent, along with Justice Alito’s separate opinion, and a subsequent opinion from Justice Kavanaugh, have inspired significant new research by a number of legal scholars. In fact, the Gray Center will soon workshop several new papers at a research roundtable, and discuss them in the autumn at a public policy conference.

One of the first major contributions to this wave of new scholarship is a draft article by Professors Nicholas Bagley and Julian Davis Mortenson. In “Delegation at the Founding,” the University of Michigan professors contend that the Constitution’s original meaning does not support calls for a reinvigorated nondelegation doctrine.

More

On October 25, 2019, the Gray Center hosted “The Administration of Immigration.” For this conference, the Gray Center invited scholars to write papers exploring ways to improve our nation’s immigration system, and discuss them alongside other experts in panel sessions addressing such topics as whether immigration law is special, the costs and benefits of immigration, judicial review of the immigration system, and the moral underpinnings of immigration law. The event also featured keynote remarks from James McHenry, Director of the Executive Office of Immigration Review at the United States Department of Justice.

The second panel looked at national security, special courts, and whether immigration law is special. The discussion revolved around a new working paper on “The Forgotten FISA Court: Exploring the Inactivity of the Alien Terrorist Removal Court” by panelist Aram Gavoor (co-authored by Timothy Belsan). The panel was moderated by Jesse Panuccio, who is affiliated with the Gray Center as a Public Service Fellow. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-immigration/.

More

On October 25, 2019, the Gray Center hosted “The Administration of Immigration.” For this conference, the Gray Center invited scholars to write papers exploring ways to improve our nation’s immigration system, and discuss them alongside other experts in panel sessions addressing such topics as whether immigration law is special, the costs and benefits of immigration, judicial review of the immigration system, and the moral underpinnings of immigration law. The event also featured keynote remarks from James McHenry, Director of the Executive Office of Immigration Review at the United States Department of Justice.

The first panel looked at moral underpinnings of immigration law. It featured a discussion about three new working papers, one by Craig S. Lerner on “Crimes Involving Moral Turpitude”: The Puzzling and Persistent (and Constitutional) Immigration Law Doctrine,” one by William W. Chip on “E-Verify: Mining Government Databases to Deter Employment of Unauthorized Aliens,” and a paper by Cassandra Burke Robertson on “Litigating Citizenship” (co-authored by Irina Manta). The panel was moderated by the Gray Center’s then-Deputy Director, Andrew Kloster. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-immigration/.

More

On October 4, 2019, the Gray Center co-hosted “The Administration of Democracy⏤The George Mason Law Review’s Second Annual Symposium on Administrative Law.” For the second annual symposium, scholars wrote papers on such fundamental questions as: Is nonpartisan campaign-finance regulation possible? Who should draw electoral maps—and how? How can we best protect voting rights? How should the census be administered? How do we preserve the regulatory process’s democratic legitimacy? And, are members of Congress entitled to see the President’s tax returns? These papers are forthcoming in the George Mason Law Review. In addition, the event featured a Keynote Conversation with two former public servants with deep expertise in both governance and campaigns: Robert Bauer, former White House Counsel to President Obama, and Donald McGahn, former White House Counsel to President Trump.

The fifth panel looked at the IRS, Congress, and the President’s tax returns, featuring a discussion of a paper titled “The President’s Tax Returns” by the University of Iowa Law School’s Professor Andy Grewal. The panel was moderated by the Gray Center’s Executive Director, Adam White. The video is available at http://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-democracy-the-george-mason-law-reviews-second-annual-symposium-on-administrative-law/.

More

On October 4, 2019, the Gray Center co-hosted “The Administration of Democracy⏤The George Mason Law Review’s Second Annual Symposium on Administrative Law.” For the second annual symposium, scholars wrote papers on such fundamental questions as: Is nonpartisan campaign-finance regulation possible? Who should draw electoral maps—and how? How can we best protect voting rights? How should the census be administered? How do we preserve the regulatory process’s democratic legitimacy? And, are members of Congress entitled to see the President’s tax returns? These papers are forthcoming in the George Mason Law Review. In addition, the event featured a Keynote Conversation with two former public servants with deep expertise in both governance and campaigns: Robert Bauer, former White House Counsel to President Obama, and Donald McGahn, former White House Counsel to President Trump.

The fourth panel focused on the democracy of administration. Speakers discussed a paper by the University of Louisville’s Professor Russell L. Weaver, titled “Rulemaking in an Internet Era: Dealing with Bots, Trolls & ‘Form Letters.’” The panel was moderated by Antonin Scalia Law School Professor and Gray Center Affiliated Faculty Member, Carolina Cecot, and introduced by Gray Center Executive Director, Adam White. The video is available at http://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-democracy-the-george-mason-law-reviews-second-annual-symposium-on-administrative-law/.

More

On October 4, 2019, the Gray Center co-hosted “The Administration of Democracy⏤The George Mason Law Review’s Second Annual Symposium on Administrative Law.” For the second annual symposium, scholars wrote papers on such fundamental questions as: Is nonpartisan campaign-finance regulation possible? Who should draw electoral maps—and how? How can we best protect voting rights? How should the census be administered? How do we preserve the regulatory process’s democratic legitimacy? And, are members of Congress entitled to see the President’s tax returns? These papers are forthcoming in the George Mason Law Review. In addition, the event featured a Keynote Conversation with two former public servants with deep expertise in both governance and campaigns: Robert Bauer, former White House Counsel to President Obama, and Donald McGahn, former White House Counsel to President Trump.

The third panel looked at the administration of the census, centering on a paper titled, “Motive and Opportunity: Courts’ Intrusions into Discretionary Decisions of Other Branches—A Comment on Department of Commerce v. New York” by Ron Cass, President of Cass & Associates, and Distinguished Senior Fellow at the Gray Center. The panel was moderated by Conor Woodfin, Editor-In-Chief of the George Mason Law Review, and introduced by the Gray Center’s Executive Director, Adam White. The video is available at http://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-democracy-the-george-mason-law-reviews-second-annual-symposium-on-administrative-law/.

More

On October 4, 2019, the Gray Center co-hosted “The Administration of Democracy⏤The George Mason Law Review’s Second Annual Symposium on Administrative Law.” For the second annual symposium, scholars wrote papers on such fundamental questions as: Is nonpartisan campaign-finance regulation possible? Who should draw electoral maps—and how? How can we best protect voting rights? How should the census be administered? How do we preserve the regulatory process’s democratic legitimacy? And, are members of Congress entitled to see the President’s tax returns? These papers are forthcoming in the George Mason Law Review. In addition, the event featured a Keynote Conversation with two former public servants with deep expertise in both governance and campaigns: Robert Bauer, former White House Counsel to President Obama, and Donald McGahn, former White House Counsel to President Trump.

The first panel focused on the administration of federal campaign finance laws. We discussed two new papers: Capital University Law School Professor Bradley Smith’s paper, “Feckless: A Critique of Criticism of the Federal Election Commission Structure, and Possible Lessons for the Administration of Campaign Finance and Election Law,” and George Washington University Law Professor Richard Pierce’s paper, “A Realistic Version of Campaign Finance Reform and Two Essential Steps Toward a Return to Effective Governance.” Pierce is affiliated with the Gray Center as a member of our Advisory Council. The discussion was moderated by the Gray Center’s Executive Director, Adam White, and also features a welcome from George Mason Law Review Editor-In-Chief, Conor Woodfin. The video is available at http://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-democracy-the-george-mason-law-reviews-second-annual-symposium-on-administrative-law/.

More

On October 4, 2019, the Gray Center co-hosted “The Administration of Democracy⏤The George Mason Law Review’s Second Annual Symposium on Administrative Law.” For the second annual symposium, scholars wrote papers on such fundamental questions as: Is nonpartisan campaign-finance regulation possible? Who should draw electoral maps—and how? How can we best protect voting rights? How should the census be administered? How do we preserve the regulatory process’s democratic legitimacy? And, are members of Congress entitled to see the President’s tax returns? These papers are forthcoming in the George Mason Law Review. In addition, the event featured a Keynote Conversation with two former public servants with deep expertise in both governance and campaigns: Robert Bauer, former White House Counsel to President Obama, and Donald McGahn, former White House Counsel to President Trump.

The second panel focused on the administration of elections. The discussion revolved around three new papers: “Bush v. Gore, Decentralized Election Administration, and the Equal Protection Right to Vote” by Florida State University College of Law Professor Michael Morley, “How Independent is Too Independent?: Redistricting Commissions and the Growth of the Unaccountable Administrative State,” by Jason Torchinsky, Partner at Holtzman Vogel Josefiak Torchinsky PLLC; and “Independent Institutions and the Design of Fair Districting Maps” by New York University School of Law’s Richard Pildes. The discussion was moderated by the Gray Center’s Deputy Director, Andrew Kloster, and introduced by the Center’s Executive Director, Adam White. The video is available at http://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-democracy-the-george-mason-law-reviews-second-annual-symposium-on-administrative-law/.

More

On October 4, 2019, the Gray Center co-hosted “The Administration of Democracy⏤The George Mason Law Review’s Second Annual Symposium on Administrative Law.” For the second annual symposium, scholars wrote papers on such fundamental questions as: Is nonpartisan campaign-finance regulation possible? Who should draw electoral maps—and how? How can we best protect voting rights? How should the census be administered? How do we preserve the regulatory process’s democratic legitimacy? And, are members of Congress entitled to see the President’s tax returns? These papers are forthcoming in the George Mason Law Review. In addition, the event featured a Keynote Conversation with two former public servants with deep expertise in both governance and campaigns: Robert Bauer, former White House Counsel to President Obama, and Donald McGahn, former White House Counsel to President Trump.

The keynote conversation featured Bauer, now at NYU Law School, and McGahn, currently a Partner at Jones Day, discussing the current state of political campaigns and elections, and whether reforms are needed. This session was moderated by the Gray Center’s Executive Director, Adam White. The video is available at http://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-administration-of-democracy-the-george-mason-law-reviews-second-annual-symposium-on-administrative-law/.

More

On October 8, 2019, the Gray Center lost a great friend and mentor when Michael Uhlmann passed away at the age of 79. Professor Uhlmann served most recently as a Professor of Government at the Claremont Graduate University and Claremont McKenna College; previously he served in the federal government’s executive and legislative branches, taught at George Mason University, and contributed his efforts and experience to many other institutions. He was a friend and mentor to many, including the Gray Center’s Director, Adam White. We were grateful to him for serving on our Advisory Council, and we miss him greatly.

In his honor, we are releasing the audio from a 2019 conference at which he spoke on Congress and the Administrative State.

More

On September 13, the Gray Center hosted a conference on The Future of White House Regulatory Oversight and Cost-Benefit Analysis. At the conference, a number of scholars presented new research on cost-benefit analysis and the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or “OIRA.” All of the papers are available on the Gray Center’s web site. And the conference was keynoted by the White House’s Acting Administration of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Paul Ray.

Our closing panel was focused on improving agency cost-benefit analyses. We discussed three new papers: Caroline Cecot and Robert Hahn’s paper on “Transparency in Agency Cost-Benefit Analysis”; Jerry Ellig and Richard Williams’s “David Versus Godzilla: Bigger Stones”; and William Yeatman’s paper, “Why Two Congressional OIRA Are Better Than One.” In the discussion, Cecot, Williams, and Yeatman were joined by Connor Raso. The discussion was moderated by the Gray Center’s Director, Adam White. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-future-of-white-house-regulatory-oversight-and-cost-benefit-analysis/.

More

On September 13, the Gray Center hosted a conference on The Future of White House Regulatory Oversight and Cost-Benefit Analysis. At the conference, a number of scholars presented new research on cost-benefit analysis and the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or “OIRA.” All of the papers are available on the Gray Center’s web site. And the conference was keynoted by the White House’s Acting Administrator for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Paul Ray.

Our third panel focused on the use of “regulatory budgets” in White House regulatory oversight. For decades, scholars have debated whether agencies should be bound by “regulatory budgets”; in 2017, President Trump signed Executive Order 13771, placing a kind of regulatory budget on executive agencies. At our conference, Jim Tozzi presented a new paper on OIRA and regulatory budgets. He was joined in the discussion by former OIRA Administrator Chris DeMuth and Professor Richard Pierce, and also by Anthony Campau, who served OIRA under Administrator Neomi Rao, and helped with the initial implementation of EO 13771. The discussion was moderated by the Gray Center’s Deputy Director, Andrew Kloster. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-future-of-white-house-regulatory-oversight-and-cost-benefit-analysis/.

More

On September 13, the Gray Center hosted a conference on The Future of White House Regulatory Oversight and Cost-Benefit Analysis. At the conference, a number of scholars presented new research on cost-benefit analysis and the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or “OIRA.” All of the papers are available on the Gray Center’s web site. And the conference was keynoted by the White House’s Acting Administration of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Paul Ray.

Our second panel focused on the place of cost-benefit analysis in judicial review of agency action. We discussed two new papers: “Codifying the Cost-Benefit State,” by Brian Mannix and Bridget Dooling; and “The Ascendancy of the Cost-Benefit State,” by Paul Noe. In the discussion, Dooling and Noe were joined by Professor Bill Buzbee and former White House Counsel C. Boyden Gray. The discussion was moderated by Professor Kristin Hickman. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-future-of-white-house-regulatory-oversight-and-cost-benefit-analysis/.

More

On September 13, the Gray Center hosted a conference on The Future of White House Regulatory Oversight and Cost-Benefit Analysis. At the conference, a number of scholars presented new research on cost-benefit analysis and the White House’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, or “OIRA.” All of the papers are available on the Gray Center’s web site. And the conference was keynoted by the White House’s Acting Administrator for the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Paul Ray.

Our first panel focused on OIRA. We discussed two new papers: Former OIRA Administrator Susan Dudley’s paper, titled “OIRA Past and Present,” and a paper by Rutgers University Professor Stuart Shapiro, titled “OIRA’s Dual Role and the Future of Cost Benefit Analysis.” They were joined in the discussion by two former OIRA Administrators: the Hudson Institute’s Chris DeMuth, and NYU’s Sally Katzen. Both DeMuth and Katzen are affiliated with the Gray Center, as Distinguished Senior Fellows. The discussion was moderated by the Gray Center’s Director, Adam White. The papers and video are available at https://administrativestate.gmu.edu/events/the-future-of-white-house-regulatory-oversight-and-cost-benefit-analysis/.

More

The C. Boyden Gray Center for the Administrative State, at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School, supports research and debate on the modern administrative state, and the constitutional issues surrounding it. In this podcast, we’ll discuss some of the questions being debated around modern administration — some new questions, some timeless ones. And you can also get the audio from Gray Center events

More