Regulatory Antecedents and the Major Questions Doctrine

33 Pages Posted: 12 Dec 2022 Last revised: 9 Jan 2024

See all articles by Richard L. Revesz

Richard L. Revesz

New York University School of Law

Max Sarinsky

New York University School of Law

Date Written: November 29, 2022

Abstract

In recent years, federal courts have increasingly assessed the legality of regulatory action by considering its antecedents, or lack thereof, in prior agency actions. In several notable Supreme Court decisions—most recently, in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency—a majority of justices have expressed skepticism of agency authority when “an agency claims to discover in a long-extant statute an unheralded power to regulate a significant portion of the American economy.” District and appellate courts have relied on this language to strike down numerous agency actions dating back to 2014.

Yet federal agencies have insufficiently adapted to this increased judicial focus on regulatory antecedents. While significant agency rulemakings typically include extensive dockets with many different types of analysis, they have generally provided limited analysis of regulatory antecedents. When agencies do provide relevant analysis, as they have for several recent proposals that have met objections under the major questions doctrine, such analysis often fails to catalog key regulatory antecedents or is insufficiently targeted to legal objections from opponents of the policy. In some actions, the only explicit discussion of the Supreme Court’s emphasis on agency exercise of “unheralded power” comes from dissenting commissioners on a multi-member agency.

This Article suggests that agencies more extensively catalog regulatory antecedents at all stages of the rulemaking process, from drafting to promulgation. By assessing antecedents in regulatory proposals, agencies can more fully lay the foundation for their authority and facilitate targeted comments that consider whether the antecedents offered by the agency support the proposed action. This will enable an even more complete analysis of regulatory antecedents in the final rulemaking, including responses to legal objections, which will provide government litigators with a roadmap for responding to claims that the agency action is unheralded and thereby reduce the vulnerability of agency action under the major questions doctrine.

Keywords: major questions doctrine, regulation, environmental regulation, statutory interpretation

JEL Classification: K3, K32, Q4, Q48, Q58

Suggested Citation

Revesz, Richard L. and Sarinsky, Max, Regulatory Antecedents and the Major Questions Doctrine (November 29, 2022). Georgetown Environmental Law Review (GELR), Forthcoming, NYU School of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 23-25, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4291030 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4291030

Richard L. Revesz (Contact Author)

New York University School of Law ( email )

40 Washington Square South
New York, NY 10012-1099
United States
212-998-6185 (Phone)
212-995-4590 (Fax)

Max Sarinsky

New York University School of Law ( email )

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
283
Abstract Views
996
Rank
196,431
PlumX Metrics