Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=893196
 
 

Footnotes (138)



 


 



Skepticism and Expertise: The Supreme Court and the EEOC


Melissa Hart


University of Colorado Law School


Fordham Law Review, Vol. 74, p. 1937, 2006
U of Colorado Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 06-04

Abstract:     
The Supreme Court regularly denies deference to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's interpretations of the federal antidiscrimination laws which that agency is charged with enforcing and interpreting. The Court's lack of deference for EEOC interpretation is in part a function of the analytical framework that the Court has created for assessing the deference due to different types of administrative interpretation. But this essay argues that the Court's lack of deference cannot be entirely explained with reference to these neutral analytical criteria. The Court's attitude toward the EEOC may also be explained as a consequence both of judicial reluctance to view discrimination as a subject of agency expertise and of skepticism about the political agenda of an agency empowered to enforce antidiscrimination requirements.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 27

Keywords: civil rights, administrative law, employment practice, courts

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: March 27, 2006  

Suggested Citation

Hart, Melissa, Skepticism and Expertise: The Supreme Court and the EEOC. Fordham Law Review, Vol. 74, p. 1937, 2006; U of Colorado Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 06-04. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=893196

Contact Information

Melissa Hart (Contact Author)
University of Colorado Law School ( email )
401 UCB
Boulder, CO 80309
United States
303-735-6344 (Phone)
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 900
Downloads: 146
Download Rank: 115,831
Footnotes:  138

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.281 seconds