In this season's final installment of the Hard Look Series , we take a focused look back at the first 100 days of Donald Trump’s presidency—not through the lens of news headlines or viral clips, but through the quieter, often more consequential corridors of administrative law. Professors Jennifer Selin and Chris Walker join us to reflect.
View the transcription here.
Show Notes:
More From Our Guests:
On this episode of A Hard Look, we examine the President’s power to remove independent agency officials. That’s right! We’re going all the way back to the 1935 landmark decision in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. Helping us navigate this discussion is Daniel Wolff, Partner at Crowell & Moring LLP, and head of the firm’s administrative law practice. Tune in for an in-depth discussion on the future of executive authority and regulatory independence.
Show Notes:
Editorial Note: This episode was recorded in March 2025, and the status of any ongoing cases discussed may have changed since then.
Recommended Readings
Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935)
Myers v. United States (1926)
Morrison v. Olson (1988)
Seila Law LLC v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (2020)
Trump v. Wilcox (2025)
This episode was produced by the Administrative Law Review Senior Technology Editor, Sophia Navedo-Quinones, and Technology Editor, Victoria Paul.
If you have any questions about this episode or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.
Visit our website: https://administrativelawreview.org/podcast-a-hard-look/
On this episode of A Hard Look, we’re discussing the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright; the case that overruled the infamous Chevron Doctrine. Since last summer, there has been meaningful legal developments within lower circuits. Professor of Law and legal scholar, Cary Coglianese, joins us to discuss what—if any—indications these decisions mean for a post-Loper Bright landscape.(*)
* Editorial Note: At the time of recording, this episode referred to the article Professor Coglianese wrote with Professor Daniel E. Walters, “The Great Unsettling: Administrative Governance After Loper Bright,” as “forthcoming.” This article has since been published and is now available online at the adminstrativelawreview.org.
The transcript of the episode can be found here or on our website.
Show Notes:
Listen to our pre-Loper Bright episode, where we interviewed Daniel M. Sullivan to discuss the critiques and weaknesses of Chevron doctrine, potential constitutional problems with judicial review of agency decisions, and what administrative law may look like after the decision.
Read more:
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and the Future of Agency Interpretations of Law by Congressional Research Service (Dec. 31, 2024)
How did a chaotic Taylor Swift ticket sale lead to DOJ filing a suit against the largest entertainment company in the world? In yet another example of how administrative law touches our everyday lives, we examine the DOJ’s pursuit to exercise its enforcement powers by pursuing antitrust claims against Live Nation and its subsidiary, Ticketmaster. Attorney Reb Masel from Rebuttal Podcast, joins us to discuss the legal framework that grants DOJ enforcement power and the extent to which DOJ—and other agencies—can wield it. Special thanks to ALR Staffers Linda Cullen, Peyton Kreuscher, and Maddie Haggard for their assistance with research and preparation for this episode.
The transcript of this episode can be found here.
Show Notes:
In our second installment of our new “Quick Look” series, we review the Administrative Procedure Act—or APA—a vital statute that is key to navigating and influencing the regulatory world.
Show Notes:
Administrative Procedure Act, Pub L. No. 79-404, 324 Stat. 237 (1946) ACUS Sourcebook Judicial Review Under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by Congressional Research Service Administrative Law and Regulatory Policy: Problems, Text, and Cases by Stephen G. Breyer, et al. George B. Shepherd, The Administrative Procedure Act Emerges from New Deal Politics, 90 Nw. L. Rev. 1557 (1996). The Federal RegisterWelcome back to A Hard Look! This offers a deeper dive into The Mandate for Leadership, also known as Project 2025. In Part Two, we analyze the document alongside experts Dr. Don Kettl and Dr. Jennifer Selin.
Visit our website: https://administrativelawreview.org/podcast-a-hard-look/
Learn more about our guests
Jennifer Selin: Google Scholar Profile
Recommended Readings
"Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise” by The Heritage Foundation (also known as Project 2025)
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)
“The Importance of Removal Restrictions in a Schedule F World” by Jennifer Selin and Paul Verkuil
“The Divided States of America” by Donald Kettl
This episode was produced by the Administrative Law Review Senior Technology Editor, Sophia Navedo-Quinones, and Technology Editor, Victoria Paul. Thank you to American University Washington College of Law’s Professor Lubbers and Professor Popper for their guidance on this episode.
If you have any questions about this episode or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.
The transcript for this episode can be found here.
Welcome back to A Hard Look! This episode provides an objective overview of The Mandate for Leadership, also known as Project 2025. This is Part One, of our two-part series on Project 2025. Stay tuned for Part Two, which is a Q&A with legal and policy experts. ,
Visit our website: https://administrativelawreview.org/podcast-a-hard-look/
Recommended Readings
Project 2025 by the Heritage Foundation
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)
This episode was produced by the Administrative Law Review Senior Technology Editor, Sophia Navedo-Quinones, and Technology Editor, Victoria Paul.
If you have any questions about this episode or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.
The transcript for this episode can be found here.
Welcome back to A Hard Look! Listen to our first episode of our new “Quick Look” series, where we provide insight into foundational administrative law principles. In today’s episode, we start with basics and define administrative law, provide an overview of its principles, and discuss its development within the United States.
Show Notes
Visit our website: https://administrativelawreview.org/podcast-a-hard-look/
Recommended Readings
Administrative Law and Process in a Nutshell by Ronald M. Levin & Jeffrey S, Lubbers
Administrative Law and Regulatory Policy: Problems, Text, and Cases by Stephen G. Breyer, et al.
This episode was produced by the Administrative Law Review Senior Technology Editor, Sophia Navedo-Quinones, and Technology Editor, Victoria Paul. Thank you to Professor Jeffrey S. Lubbers at American University Washington College of Law for contributing to this episode's development.
If you have any questions about this episode or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.
A Hard Look, a podcast by the Administrative Law Review, covers recent events in administrative law, regulatory policy, and the critiques and praise of various regulations and their efficacy. This season, stand by for our new series: A Quick Look and A Hard Look at What's to Come, in addition to our traditional A Hard Look episodes!
If you have any questions about the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.
On this Episode of A Hard Look, Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews Professor Mark Rotenberg regarding immunities provided to government officials, especially the President and Executive Branch. The conversation ranges from a history of official immunities in the United States, the distinctions between civil and criminal immunity, and rounding out with a discussion of the ongoing litigation against President Donald Trump within the D.C. Circuit.
This episode was produced by ALR Technology Editor Anthony Aviza.
---
Recommended Reading:
This Episode’s Transcript United States v. Trump Decision Nixon v. Fitzgerald Clinton v. Jones Trump v. Mazars
Note: This episode was recorded before the Oral Arguments in Trump v. United States, which was rescheduled for April 25th, 2024 by the time this episode was published.
In this Episode of A Hard Look, ALR Senior Technology Editor, Bennett J. Nuss interviews Professor James Ridgway about the practical effects of an ambiguous ambiguity doctrine as promulgated by Chevron, using Veteran’s Law as a case example. This discussion ranges from a discussion of the history of Veterans Law, a critical examination of the motivators within administrative agencies which may contribute to ineffectiveness and court challenges, and theorizing about how iterative learning may improve agency rulemaking.
This episode was produced by ALR Technology Editor Anthony Aviza.
---
Recommended Reading:
This Episode’s Transcript
J.B. Rule and James Salzman, Mozart and the Red Queen: The Problem of Regulatory Accretion in the Administrative State.
Kent Barnett and Christopher J. Walker, Chevron
in the Circuit Courts
If a military veteran you know is in need of assistance, you can find Vet Centers for Readjustment Counseling as well as information regarding benefits at www.va.gov.
On this Episode of A Hard Look, ALR Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews ABA Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice Section Chairman Adam White regarding the current state of Administrative Law in the United States and what to expect out of what is almost certain to be a groundbreaking year. The conversation ranges from the ABA’s role in the promotion of administrative law doctrines, how the political divides in administrative law may not be as clear as they once seemed, and a preview of some themes and important cases coming to a head this year.
---
This episode was produced by ALR Technology Editor, Anthony Aviza.
If you have questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
On this Episode of A Hard Look, ALR Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews Holwell, Shuster & Goldberg Partner Daniel M. Sullivan regarding the controversial Supreme Court case Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which has the potential to completely overhaul Administrative Law as we know it. The discussion ranges from the critiques and weaknesses of Chevron doctrine, potential constitutional problems with judicial review of agency decisions, and what administrative law may look like after this groundbreaking term.
---
This episode was produced by ALR Technology Editor, Anthony Aviza.
Many thanks to ALR Editor-in-Chief Madison Gestiehr for her help in providing transcription for this episode.
If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
Recommended Reading:
Chevron v. NRDC
Marbury v. Madison
Amicus and Filings for Loper Bright
Transcript
On this Episode of A Hard Look, ALR Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews Professor Hilary J. Allen regarding the current status of federal banking regulation in light of the four bank failures in the United States earlier this year. The discussion ranges from the circumstances surrounding the failure of the Silicon Valley Bank, how the public’s response to the failure may be overstated in terms of impact, the role of the FDIC in the disbursement of assets, and what the future would look like if all bank deposits were insured by the Federal Government.
---
This episode was produced by ALR technology editor, Anthony Aviza.
If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
Recommended Reading:
FDIC: Bank Failures in Brief – 2023
Investopedia: What Happened to Silicon Valley Bank?
The Federal Reserves’ Review of Supervision and Regulation of Silicon Valley Bank
New York Times: Silicon Valley Bank Fails After Run on Deposits
On this Episode of A Hard Look, ALR Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews Professor Daniel Cohen regarding the current rise of Major Questions Doctrine in American Jurisprudence in contrast to the perceived fall of Chevron Doctrine. The conversation goes from an interrogation of current judicial review methods for agency action, to investigating potential issues with Major Questions Doctrine, and concluding with thoughts about the future of judicial deference and the balance of powers as we know them.
---
This episode was produced by ALR Technology Editor, Anthony Aviza.
If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
Many thanks to ALR Editor-in-Chief Madison Gestiehr and Senior Articles Editor Mehraz Rahman for their assistance in providing the transcription for this Episode.
---
Recommended Reading
This Episode’s Transcript Chevron v. Natural Recourses Defense Council Skidmore v. Swift Public Water Supply Co. v. DiPasquale FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. King v. Burwell Alabama Association of Realtors v. HHS NFIB v. OSHA West Virginia v. EPA Biden v. Nebraska
In this episode of A Hard Look, Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews current Washington College of Law 3L and Senior Articles Editor Mehraz Rahman regarding her comment published in ALR Volume 75.3. In this episode, we review the ongoing controversies surrounding Title IX sexual misconduct adjudication on college campuses, and how standards for holding these adjudications have changed from administration to administration over the course of the past decade. Then we turn our attention to how this process can be formalized and reformed to better serve the interests of victims, accused, and the substantial interests of justice and due process implicated in these hearings.
---
This Episode was produced by Administrative Law Review Technology Editor Anthony Aviza.
If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
---
If you believe you have been a victim of sexual violence, you can use the recourses below to find help:
For AU Students, please contact the Office of Equity and Title IX.
For Non-Students: National Sexual Assault Hotline with Confidential 24/7 Support: 1-800-656-4673 Campus Sexual Violence Recourse List
---
Recommended Reading
Mehraz’s Comment (TBP) This Episode's Transcript
Withdrawal of the 2011 DCL & 2014 Q&A
U.S. Department of Education’s 2022 Proposed Amendments to Title IX Regulations
On this episode of A Hard Look, Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews Adam Pollock, a 3L at American University Washington College of Law and current Editor for Online Publications. In this episode, we review the systemic structure of the Bureau of Immigration Appeals, and how this system is operating considering the ever-growing strain of immigration on U.S. Courts. We also interrogate the propriety and effects of Patel v. Garland, a Supreme Court case that limits the degree of review afforded to those that appeal rulings by the BIA. Finally, we look at how the BIA can be potentially reformed to better serve the interests of fairness and substantial justice.
---
This Episode was produced by Administrative Law Review Technology Editor, Anthony Aviza.
Many thanks as well to Administrative Law Review Editor-in-Chief Madison Gestiehr for her assistance in transcribing this episode.
If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
---
Recommended Reading:
This Episode’s TranscriptDeported Over a Typo: Making Sense of the Board of Appeals’Newfound Administrative Power in the Wake of Patel v. Garland
Patel v.Garland
Congressional Research Service: U.S. Immigration Courts and the Pending Cases Backlog
Innovation Law Lab: The Attorney General’s Judges
On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, Alexander Naum speak with Lauren Saxe, a rising 2L at American University Washington College of Law and ALR's incoming Senior Symposia & Communications Editor. In this episode, we review the regulatory framework surrounding FDA’s approval of Mifepristone in 2000. Including reviewing and questioning its REMS status by the Agency. As well as analyzing how the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs has limited access to this medication. And how recent and pending federal jurisprudence can potentially jeopardize nationwide access to this medication for patients seeking access to abortion and miscarriage treatment. If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, Alexander Naum, and our Technology Editor, Eva Pedersen speak with information justice and intellectual property expert, Michael W. Carroll. In this episode, we review the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI), including the popular program "ChatGPT." We analyze the potential fair use implications of these programs, as well as the broader ethical and legal challenges in regulating these programs.
If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.
On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, Alexander Naum speak with Linda Reinstein (President and Co-founder of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization). In this episode, we explore the history of asbestos’s commercial use in the United States and the health threats associated with asbestos exposure. The episode dives into the EPA’s failed attempt to ban asbestos and the gaps found within current asbestos regulation. As well as the continued progress made by the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization in urging Federal Agencies and Congress to protect workers and communities from asbestos exposure.
If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu
