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 ā€” and Democracy ā€” in Administrative Law, Professor Jim Rossi offers additional considerations for developing a fuller account of dialogue in administrative law. This reply takes up Professor Rossiā€™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
347