Kalvis Golde (Columbia Law School) has posted The Question of Presidential Immunity for Arbitrary and Capricious Review on SSRN. Here is the abstract:
When can challengers sue under the Administrative Procedure Act over agency action taken at the direction of the President? This difficult question has long divided the lower courts. But the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Trump v. United States portends a troubling answer: never, so long as the President orders or endorses the action themselves. Trump was a case about presidential immunity for crimes. Its sweeping holdings about core and exclusive presidential power, however, have led to extensive analysis and criticism. Adding a layer the discussion, this Comment explores the implications for arbitrary and capricious review under the APA if the second Trump administration argues, and courts agree, that Trump should be read for all it is worth.
To receive new posts from Legal Theory Blog by email, get a free subscription to Legal Theory Stack.
Lawrence Solum