112 Columbia Law Review Sidebar 185 (2012)
9 Pages Posted: 4 Aug 2012 Last revised: 27 Aug 2012
Date Written: 2012
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: 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