Dialogue, Deferred and Differentiated

112 Columbia Law Review Sidebar 185 (2012)

Wake Forest Univ. Legal Studies Paper No. 2123306

9 Pages Posted: 4 Aug 2012 Last revised: 27 Aug 2012

Emily Hammond

George Washington University - Law School

Date Written: 2012

Abstract

When agency actions are challenged in court multiple times in an iterative fashion, the resulting dialogue offers insights into the features of the court/agency relationship that are not necessarily apparent in other contexts. In Deference and Dialogue in Administrative Law, I examine a number of serial cases and develop a dialogic account of the resulting back-and-forth exchanges. In his thoughtful response, Of Dialogue — and Democracy — in Administrative Law, Professor Jim Rossi offers additional considerations for developing a fuller account of dialogue in administrative law. This reply takes up Professor Rossi’s invitation to consider how reviewability doctrines factor into the dialogic account of administrative law. In addition, it offers a more broadly conceived view of dialogue as an attractive and important legitimizing component of effective governance.

Keywords: administrative, nonreviewability, risk regulation, dialogue, judicial review

Suggested Citation

Hammond, Emily, Dialogue, Deferred and Differentiated (2012). 112 Columbia Law Review Sidebar 185 (2012) ; Wake Forest Univ. Legal Studies Paper No. 2123306. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2123306

Emily Hammond (Contact Author)

George Washington University - Law School ( email )

2000 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20052
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
31
Abstract Views
351