4 ms·
MQD comes from the 2022 EPA decision. It "announces the arrival of the "major questions doctrine"", that is a direct quote from the decision. None of this power
by jhp123 2y ago
MQD comes from the 2022 EPA decision. It "announces the arrival of the "major questions doctrine"", that is a direct quote from the decision. None of this power grab is obvious at all or they would be unanimous decisions.
- tptacek 2y agoThe underlying judicial phenomenon, which seems to have involved different names (all including "major questions"), appears to long precede 2022. https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-129/major-question-objections/ https://harvardlawreview.org/print/vol-129/major-question-ob...
- rayiner 2y agoMQD was applied in FDA v. Brown & Williamson in 2000. That decision cited a 1986 law review article by future Justice Breyer: Breyer, Judicial Review of Questions of Law and Policy, 38 Admin. L. Rev. 363, 370 (1986) ("A court may also ask whether the legal question is an important one. Congress is more likely to have focused upon, and answered, major questions, while leaving interstitial matters to answer themselves in the course of the statute's daily administration").
- jhp123 2y agoas tptacek's link makes clear, "major questions" was a muddied and rarely-cited corner of the law in 2016. The "major questions doctrine" per se made its appearance in the 2022 decision and was in fact the main purpose of writing a decision banning a rule that had never taken effect and was now obsolete. When Carr (echoing the conservative majority in Loper) claims that Chevron was all but dead already due to MQD, that certainly wasn't the case before 2022. So your pedantic correction is missing the point even if it were textually accurate.