Reexamining Marbury in the Administrative State: A Structural and Institutional Defense of Judicial Power Over Statutory Interpretation

2001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan T. Molot
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Power ◽  
Administrative State ◽  
Statutory Interpretation

The Judicial Response to the Administrative State

2021 ◽  
pp. 87-98
Author(s):  
James E. Pfander
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Administrative State ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Way ◽  
Judicial Role

This chapter describes the way a requirement of contestation was introduced into definitions of federal judicial power in the latter half of the nineteenth century. The case-or-controversy requirement arose as a tool with which federal courts could refrain from lending support to the investigatory and regulatory initiatives of the growing administrative state. Justice Stephen Field played a central role in the introduction of the contestation construct, and it took hold at the Supreme Court in the twentieth century, as progressive Justices came to embrace contestation as an essential limit on the judicial role in constitutional litigation.

scholarly journals To Delegate or Redelegate: Is That The Question?

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Halper
Keyword(s):  
Practical Importance ◽  
Judicial Power ◽  
Administrative State ◽  
Great Practical Importance ◽  
The Future ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Executive Agencies

Abstract Conflicts between those supporting and opposing congressional redelegation to executive agencies go back to the earliest days of the Republic, but given the enormous development of the administrative state, now raise issues of great practical importance. The arguments back and forth implicate abstract notions of democracy, efficiency, and judicial power, though typically partisan and other self interested considerations actually drive the debate. The future is likely to see some retrenchment, but not wholesale rejection of redelegation, as the massive and unpredictable consequences would deter courts from acting.

СУД ЯК УЧАСНИК КРИМІНАЛЬНОГО ПРОВАДЖЕННЯ

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 211-217
Author(s):  
В. В. Король ◽  
В. Д. Юрчишин
Keyword(s):  
Judicial Power ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Unique Position ◽  
Territorial Jurisdiction ◽  
Governmental Body ◽  
The Law

У статті зазначається, що серед учасників кримінального провадження суд посідає ви­ключне становище, оскільки тільки він є єдиним державним органом, що здійснює судову владу у визначених законом процесуальних формах. При цьому вказується, що суд по­трібно вважати встановленим законом лише за умови, що він утворений безпосередньо на підставі закону, діє в межах своєї предметної, функціональної й територіальної юрисдикції та в законному складі суду.   The article notes that among the participants in criminal proceedings the court occupies a unique position, because only it is the only governmental body which exercises the judicial power as defined by law procedural forms. It is submitted, that the court should consider the law only when it is formed directly on the basis of the law, acting within their subject, func­tional and territorial jurisdiction and legal composition of court.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document