Doctrinal Crossroads: Major Questions, Non-Delegation, and Chevron Deference
JLPP: Per Curiam and the Pacific Legal Foundation are proud to present a symposium: Doctrinal Crossroads: Major Questions, Non-Delegation, and Chevron Deference which was held at Harvard Law School on January 25, 2024. The essays in this symposium, authored by academics and practitioners alike, attempt to elucidate a deeper examination of the origins of the major questions doctrine, its theoretical underpinnings, and its compatibility (or incompatibility) with earlier precedent.
The essays in this symposium can be accessed at the following links:
Doctrinal Crossroads: Major Questions, Non-Delegation and Chevron Deference – Donald F. McGahn
The Delegation Doctrine – Jonathan H. Adler
Biden v. Nebraska and the Continued Refinement of the Major Questions Doctrine – Louis J. Capozzi III
“The Game” (or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Major Questions Doctrine) – Gary Lawson
Does the Major Questions Doctrine Get Congress Right? – Joseph Postell
Replacing the Major Questions Doctrine with Originalist Statutory Interpretation – Michael B. Rappaport
The Major Questions Doctrine: A Check on Presidential Administration – Paul J. Ray
Disparate Impact As a Non-Delegation Violation and Major Question – Alison Somin
Placing Legal Context in Context – Chad Squitieri
Practical Applications of the Major Questions Doctrine – Luke A. Wake and Damien Schiff