The three phases of Mead

Fordham Law Review

Volumn 83, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 527-554

  Hickman, Kristin E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84938823933     PISSN: 0015704X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (196)

1. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, ROMEO & JULIET act 2, sc. 2.
2. WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE, HAMLET act 2, sc. 2.
3. 533 U.S. 218 (2001).
4. Peter M. Shane & Christopher J. Walker, Foreword: Chevron at 30: Looking Back and Looking Forward, 83 FORDHAM L. REV. 475 (2014).
5. Thomas W. Merrill & Kristin E. Hickman, Chevron's Domain, 89 GEO. L.J. 833 (2001).
6. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984).
7. William N. Eskridge, Jr. & Lauren E. Baer, The Continuum of Deference: Supreme Court Treatment of Agency Statutory Interpretations from Chevron to Hamdan, 96 GEO. L.J. 1083 (2008).
8. Christensen v. Harris County, 529 U.S. 576, 589 (2000) (Scalia, J., concurring).
9. EEOC v. Arabian Am. Oil Co., 499 U.S. 244, 259-60 (1991) (Scalia, J., concurring);
10. Antonin Scalia, Judicial Deference to Administrative Interpretations of Law, 1989 DUKE L.J. 511, 516.
11. Peter H. Schuck & E. Donald Elliott, To the Chevron Station, 1990 DUKE L.J. 984, 1024.
12. 323 U.S. 134 (1944).
13. United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 226-27 (2001).
14. Nat'l Cable & Telecomms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 545 U.S. 967, 1018 (2005) (Scalia, J., dissenting);
15. United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, 132 S. Ct. 1836, 1847 (2012) (Scalia, J., concurring in part and concurring in judgment).
16. Adrian Vermeule, Introduction: Mead in the Trenches, 71 GEO. WASH. L. REV. 347, 347 (2003).
17. Lisa Schultz Bressman, How Mead Has Muddled Judicial Review of Agency Action, 58 VAND. L. REV. 1443, 1444 (2005).
18. Amy Wildermuth, What Twombly and Mead Have in Common, 102 NW. U. L. REV. COLLOQUY 276, 277-78 (2008).
19. Jack M. Beermann, Chevron at the Roberts Court: Still Failing After All These Years, 83 FORDHAM L. REV. 731, 741-43 (2014);
20. Thomas W. Merrill, Step Zero After City of Arlington, 83 FORDHAM L. REV. 753, 756-58 (2014);
21. Peter L. Strauss, In Search of Skidmore, 83 FORDHAM L. REV. 789, 792-93 (2014).
22. Michael Healy, Spurious Interpretation Redux: Mead and the Shrinking Domain of Statutory Ambiguity, 54 ADMIN. L. REV. 673, 679-80 (2002).
23. Abbe R. Gluck & Lisa Schultz Bressman, Statutory Interpretation from the Inside - An Empirical Study of Congressional Drafting, Delegation, and the Canons: Part I, 65 STAN. L. REV. 901, 994 (2013).
24. Abbe R. Gluck, What 30 Years of Chevron Teach Us About the Rest of Statutory Interpretation, 83 FORDHAM L. REV. 607, 619 (2014).
25. Kent Barnett, Improving Agencies' Preemption Expertise with Chevmore Codification, 83 FORDHAM L. REV. 587 (2014)
26. Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 12 U.S.C. § 25b(5)(A) (2012).
27. United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 230-31 (2001).
28. Thomas W. Merrill, The Mead Doctrine: Rules and Standards, Meta-Rules and Meta-Standards, 54 ADMIN. L. REV. 807, 812-13 (2002).
29. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, The Role of Dissenting Opinions, 95 MINN. L. REV. 1, 3 (2010)
30. Patricia M. Wald, The Rhetoric of Results and the Results of Rhetoric: Judicial Writings, 62 U. CHI. L. REV. 1371, 1412-15 (1995).
31. 529 U.S. 576 (2000).
32. Thomas W. Merrill, Judicial Deference to Agency Action, 9 ENGAGE: J. FEDERALIST SOC'Y PRAC. GRPS. 16, 18-19 (2008).
33. 535 U.S. 212 (2002).
34. Brief for the United States As Amicus Curiae Supporting Petitioners, Christensen, 529 U.S. 576 (No. 98-1167).
35. Skidmore v. Swift & Co., 323 U.S. 134 (1944).
36. Christensen, 529 U.S. at 585.
37. United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 222-25 (2001).
38. Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. §§ 1202, 1500, 1502 (2012);
39. C.F.R. § 177.8 (2012).
40. Mead, 533 U.S. at 224-25.
41. 499 U.S. 244 (1991).
42. Mead, 533 U.S. at 229-30
43. Gen. Elec. Co. v. Gilbert, 429 U.S. 125, 141 (1976).
44. 513 U.S. 251 (1995).
45. Mead, 533 U.S. at 231-32
46. 19 U.S.C. § 1502(a) (2012).
47. Barnhart v. Walton, 535 U.S. 212, 217 (2002)
48. 20 C.F.R. § 404.1520(b) (2001)
49. 65 Fed. Reg. 42774 (2000).
50. Kristin E. Hickman & Matthew D. Krueger, In Search of the Modern Skidmore Standard, 107 COLUM. L. REV. 1235, 1248-50 (2007);
51. Barnhart, 535 U.S. at 226.
52. Barnhart, 535 U.S. at 221.
53. Christensen v. Harris Cnty., 529 U.S. 576, 586-87 (2000).
54. Barnhart, 535 U.S. at 222.
55. Robert A. Anthony, Keeping Chevron Pure, 5 GREEN BAG 2D 371, 371 (2002).
56. Charles H. Koch, Jr., Judicial Review of Administrative Policymaking, 44 WM. & MARY L. REV. 375, 400-01 (2002).
57. William Funk, Supreme Court News, ADMIN. & REG. L. NEWS, Summer 2002, at 8.
58. Thomas W. Merrill & Kathryn Tongue Watts, Agency Rules with the Force of Law: The Original Convention, 116 HARV. L. REV. 467, 576 (2002).
59. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Res. Def. Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842-43 (1984).
60. Mead, 533 U.S. at 237-38.
61. Mayo Found. for Med. Educ. & Research v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 704, 711-12 (2011);
62. Michael P. Healy, Reconciling Chevron, Mead, and the Review of Agency Discretion: Source of Law and the Standards of Judicial Review, 19 GEO. MASON L. REV. 1, 39-40 (2011);
63. Scott H. Angstreich, Shoring Up Chevron: A Defense of Seminole Rock Deference to Agency Regulatory Interpretations, 34 U.C. DAVIS L. REV. 49, 64 (2000);
64. Peter M. Shane, Ambiguity and Policy Making, 16 VILL. ENVTL. L.J. 19, 32-33 (2005).
65. Wilderness Soc'y v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Serv., 316 F.3d 913, 921 (9th Cir. 2003)
66. 353 F.3d 1051;
67. Swallows Holding, Ltd. v. Comm'r, 515 F.3d 162, 168 (3d Cir. 2008);
68. Air Brake Sys., Inc. v. Mineta, 357 F.3d 632, 642 (6th Cir. 2004).
69. Matthew C. Stephenson & Adrian Vermeule, Chevron Has Only One Step, 95 VA. L. REV. 597 (2009).
70. United States v. Garcia-Santana, 743 F.3d 666, 678 (9th Cir. 2014);
71. Friends of the Everglades v. S. Fla. Water Mgmt. Dist., 570 F.3d 1210, 1219 (11th Cir. 2009).
72. United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 241 (2001) (Scalia, J., dissenting);
73. Vance v. Ball State Univ., 133 S. Ct. 2434, 2461 (2013);
74. Home Concrete, 132 S. Ct. at 1842;
75. Holder v. Martinez Gutierrez, 132 S. Ct. 2011, 2017 (2012).
76. Gen. Dynamics Land Sys., Inc. v. Cline, 540 U.S. 581, 600 (2004).
77. Edelman v. Lynchburg Coll., 535 U.S. 106, 114 (2002).
78. 541 U.S. 232 (2004).
79. 555 U.S. 305 (2009).
80. Yellow Transp., Inc. v. Michigan, 537 U.S. 36, 45-46 (2002).
81. Negusie v. Holder, 555 U.S. 511, 513-15 (2009).
82. 131 S. Ct. 704 (2011).
83. National Muffler Dealers Ass'n, Inc. v. United States, 440 U.S. 472 (1979), rather than Mead, Chevron, and Skidmore was a key issue in the Mayo case. Id. at 710-14.
84. 545 U.S. 967 (2005).
85. Christensen v. Harris Cnty., 529 U.S. 576, 596 (2000) (Breyer, J., dissenting).
86. Barnhart v. Walton, 535 U.S. 212, 221-22 (2002).
87. Nat'l Cable & Telecomms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 545 U.S. 967 (2005).
88. 555 U.S. 379, 395 (2009).
89. 133 S. Ct. 1863, 1875 (2013) (Breyer, J., concurring).
90. Andrew M. Grossman, City of Arlington v. FCC: Justice Scalia's Triumph, 2013 CATO SUP. CT. REV. 331.
91. City of Arlington, 133 S. Ct. at 1875 (Breyer, J., concurring).
92. Negusie v. Holder, 555 U.S. 511, 531 (2009) (Stevens, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part).
93. 132 S. Ct. 2021 (2012).
94. 529 U.S. 576, 598 (2000) (Breyer, J., dissenting).
95. Long Island Care at Home, Ltd. v. Coke, 551 U.S. 158 (2007);
96. Global Crossing Telecomms., Inc. v. Metrophones Telecomms., Inc., 550 U.S. 45 (2007);
97. Zuni Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 89 v. Dep't of Educ., 550 U.S. 81, 90 (2007).
98. United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, 132 S. Ct. 1836 (2012).
99. Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Perf. Plastics Corp., 131 S. Ct. 1325 (2011).
100. Nat'l Cable & Telecomms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 545 U.S. 967, 1016-18 (2005);
101. Smith v. City of Jackson, 544 U.S. 228, 245 (2005) (Scalia, J., concurring).
102. Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Se. Alaska Conservation Council, 557 U.S. 261, 296 (2009) (Scalia, J., concurring);
103. Smith, 544 U.S. at 245.
104. Kasten, 131 S. Ct. at 1340 n.5;
105. Brand X, 545 U.S. at 1016, 1017.
106. 133 S. Ct. 1863 (2013).
107. City of Arlington, 133 S. Ct. at 1874.
108. Gen. Dynamics Land Sys., Inc. v. Cline, 540 U.S. 581, 601-02 (2004) (Scalia, J., dissenting);
109. Christensen v. Harris Cnty., 529 U.S. 576, 590-91 (2000) (Scalia, J., concurring).
110. Christensen, 529 U.S. at 590-91.
111. 541 U.S. 1, 24-25 (2004) (Scalia, J., concurring).
112. Antonin Scalia, The Rule of Law As a Law of Rules, 56 U. CHI. L. REV. 1175, 1178-81 (1989);
113. Nicholas S. Zeppos, Justice Scalia's Textualism: The "New" New Legal Process, 12 CARDOZO L. REV. 1597, 1634 (1990).
114. Util. Air Regulatory Grp. v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, 2442-45 (2014);
115. Rapanos v. United States, 547 U.S. 715, 731-32 (2006);
116. AT&T Corp. v. Iowa Utils. Bd., 525 U.S. 366, 392 (1999).
117. Rapanos, 547 U.S. at 731-39;
118. AT&T Corp., 525 U.S. at 387-92.
119. United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, 132 S. Ct. 1836, 1846 & n.1 (2012) (Scalia, J., concurring).
120. Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., 131 S. Ct. 1325 (2011) (Scalia, J., dissenting);
121. Nat'l Cable & Telecomms. Ass'n v. Brand X Internet Servs., 545 U.S. 967, 1005-14 (2005) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
122. Mead. Household Int'l Tax Reduction Inv. Plan v. Matz, 533 U.S. 925 (2001).
123. 546 U.S. 243 (2006).
124. 541 U.S. 1, 24 (2004) (Scalia, J., concurring).
125. EPA v. EME Homer City Generation, LP, 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014);
126. Astrue v. Capato, 132 S. Ct. 2021 (2012);
127. Mayo Found. for Med. Educ. & Research v. United States, 562 U.S. 44 (2011);
128. Cuomo v. Clearing House Ass'n, 557 U.S. 519 (2009);
129. Global Crossing Telecomms., Inc. v. Metrophones Telecomm., Inc., 550 U.S. 45 (2007);
130. Zuni Pub. Sch. Dist. No. 89 v. Dep't of Educ., 550 U.S. 81 (2007);
131. Household Credit Servs. v. Pfennig, 541 U.S. 232 (2004);
132. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Echazabal, 536 U.S. 73 (2002);
133. Yellow Transp., Inc. v. Michigan, 537 U.S. 36 (2002);
134. Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Se. Alaska Conservation Council, 557 U.S. 261 (2009)
135. Auer v. Robbins, 519 U.S. 452 (1996);
136. Barnhart v. Walton, 535 U.S. 212 (2002).
137. Negusie v. Holder, 555 U.S. 511 (2009);
138. SEC v. Zandford, 535 U.S. 813 (2002).
139. United States v. Eurodif, S.A., 555 U.S. 305 (2009).
140. Brief for Petitioner, Eurodif, 555 U.S. 511 (Nos. 07-1059, 07-1078), 2008 WL 2794014, at ∗23-24;
141. Lucius B. Lau, Agency Interpretations of the Statute After Mead with a Special Emphasis on the Antidumping and Countervailing Duty Laws, 12 FED. CIR. B.J. 223, 234-37 (2002).
142. Wos v. E.M.A. ex rel Johnson, 132 S. Ct. 1391 (2013);
143. Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp., 131 S. Ct. 1325 (2011);
144. Alaska Dep't of Envtl. Conservation v. EPA, 540 U.S. 461 (2004);
145. Wash. State Dep't of Soc. & Health Servs. v. Guardianship Estate of Keffeler, 537 U.S. 371 (2003).
146. Dada v. Mukasey, 554 U.S. 1 (2008);
147. Wis. Dep't of Health & Family Servs. v. Blumer, 534 U.S. 473 (2002);
148. Christopher v. Smithkline Beecham Corp., 132 S. Ct. 2156, 2169 (2012);
149. Wyeth v. Levine, 555 U.S. 555 (2009);
150. Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc., 552 U.S. 312, 326-27 (2008).
151. Two concern Equal Employment Opportunity Commission regulations interpreting Title VII. Gen. Dynamics Land Sys. v. Cline, 540 U.S. 581 (2004);
152. Edelman v. Lynchburg Coll., 535 U.S. 106 (2002).
153. Barber v. Thomas, 560 U.S. 474 (2010);
154. Fed. Express Corp. v. Holowecki, 552 U.S. 389 (2008).
155. Lawson v. FMR, LLC, 134 S. Ct. 1158 (2014);
156. Vance v. Ball State Univ., 133 S. Ct. 2434 (2013);
157. Carcieri v. Salazar, 555 U.S. 379 (2009);
158. Hoffman Plastics Compounds v. NLRB, 535 U.S. 137 (2002);
159. New York v. FERC, 535 U.S. 1 (2002);
160. Smith v. City of Jackson, 544 U.S. 228 (2005).
161. McMaster v. United States, 731 F.3d 881, 891 & n.3 (9th Cir. 2013);
162. Wilderness League v. EPA, 727 F.3d 934, 937 (9th Cir. 2013).
163. Nat'l Treasury Emps. Union v. FLRA, 754 F.3d 1031, 1041 (D.C. Cir. 2014)
164. Nat'l Treasury Emps. Union v. FLRA, 414 F.3d 50, 57 (D.C. Cir. 2005);
165. Akram v. Holder, 721 F.3d 853, 858-59 (7th Cir. 2013)
166. Escobar v. Holder, 657 F.3d 537, 542 (7th Cir. 2011);
167. Lockheed Martin Corp. v. Dep't of Labor, 717 F.3d 1121, 1131 (10th Cir. 2013)
168. Trimmer v. Dep't of Labor, 174 F.3d 1098 (10th Cir. 1999).
169. CSX Transp., Inc. v. Surface Transp. Bd., 754 F.3d 1056, 1063 (D.C. Cir. 2014);
170. RL BB Acquisition, LLC v. Bridgemill Commons Dev. Grp., LLC, 754 F.3d 380, 384 (6th Cir. 2014).
171. Lopez v. Terrell, 654 F.3d 176, 182-83 (2d Cir. 2011);
172. Freeman v. Quicken Loans, Inc., 626 F.3d 799, 805-06 (5th Cir. 2010);
173. Bradley v. Sebelius, 621 F.3d 1330, 1338 & n.18 (11th Cir. 2010);
174. Kornman & Assocs. v. United States, 527 F.3d 443, 452-53 (5th Cir. 2008).
175. National Bank Act. United States v. Mead Corp., 533 U.S. 218, 231-32 (2001)
176. NationsBank of N.C., N.A. v. Variable Annuity Life Ins. Co., 513 U.S. 251 (1995).
177. TeamBank, N.A. v. McClure, 279 F.3d 614, 619 (8th Cir. 2002).
178. S. Rehab. Grp., PLLC v. Sec'y of Health & Human Servs., 732 F.3d 670, 685 (6th Cir. 2013);
179. Sun Capital Partners III, LP v. New England Teamsters & Trucking Indus. Pension Fund, 724 F.3d 129, 140 (1st Cir. 2013);
180. Vulcan Constr. Materials, LP v. FMSHRC, 700 F.3d 297, 316 (7th Cir. 2012);
181. Lopes v. Dep't of Soc. Servs., 696 F.3d 180, 187-88 (2d Cir. 2012).
182. 718 F.3d 1110 (9th Cir. 2013).
183. Gutnik v. Gonzales, 469 F.3d 683, 689-90 (7th Cir. 2006).
184. Cordoba v. Holder, 726 F.3d 1106 (9th Cir. 2013);
185. Dhuka v. Holder, 716 F.3d 149 (5th Cir. 2013);
186. Quinchia v. Att'y Gen., 552 F.3d 1255, 1258-59 (11th Cir. 2008).
187. Arobelidze v. Holder, 653 F.3d 513, 520 (7th Cir. 2011).
188. Dobrova v. Holder, 607 F.3d 297, 300 (2d Cir. 2010);
189. Cervantes v. Holder, 597 F.3d 299, 233 n.5 (4th Cir. 2010).
190. Nilsson v. City of Mesa, 503 F.3d 947, 953 n.3 (9th Cir. 2007).
191. Townsend v. Benjamin Enters., Inc., 679 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2012);
192. Noviello v. City of Boston, 398 F.3d 76 (1st Cir. 2005);
193. Ebbert v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 319 F.3d 103 (3d Cir. 2003).
194. United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, 132 S. Ct. 1836, 1847 (2012) (Scalia, J., concurring).
195. Kristin E. Hickman, Unpacking the Force of Law, 66 VAND. L. REV. 465 (2013).
196. Leandra Lederman, The Fight Over "Fighting Regs" and Judicial Deference in Tax Litigation, 92 B.U. L. REV. 643 (2012).