Summary:
The Supreme Court continued its project of reshaping administrative law this term. Perhaps its most widely discussed decision in this area was Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the Court overruled the doctrine of Chevron deference. How did the Chevron doctrine operate? Why, after forty years, did the Supreme Court set it aside? And what will judges do when interpreting regulatory statutes that are either ambiguous or silent on the question pending before the court?
DePaul College of Law Professor David Franklin discusses these questions on this Touro Law Review podcast with Associate Dean Rodger Citron. Franklin clerked on the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court, has taught Administrative Law and Constitutional Law for more than a decade, and recently wrote about the Loper Bright decision for Slate, see This Supreme Court has betrayed Antonin Scalia’s legacy. (slate.com).
Brought to you by the Touro Law Review.
Learn more about Professor David Franklin
David Franklin is Associate Professor of Law at DePaul College of Law, where he teaches Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, First Amendment, and Conflict of Laws. He graduated summa cum laude from Yale University and received his JD from the University of Chicago. Before becoming a law professor, Franklin was a law clerk for Judge Stephen F. Williams of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of the United States Supreme Court and a litigation associate at Covington & Burling in New York. From 2016 to 2019, Franklin served as Illinois Solicitor General, representing the state and its officers in state and federal appellate courts, including arguing two cases in the United States Supreme Court. His writing has appeared in, among other publications, the Yale Law Journal, Iowa Law Review, Chicago-Kent Law Review, Cardozo Law Review, The New Republic, Slate, Green Bag, Chicago Tribune, and Washington Post.
You must be logged in to post a comment.