The Living Congress
Adaptation or Decline?
Note from the Editor: The Federalist Society takes no positions on particular legal and public policy matters. Any expressions of opinion are those of the author. We welcome responses to the views presented here. To join the debate, please email us at info@fedsoc.org.
This year’s Convention has a series of great panels about Congress, its original meaning, and its current power and influence. Increasing polarization, gridlock, and President Obama’s expansion of executive prerogative, all point to the importance of rethinking the role of Congress.
On my Friday morning panel, “The Living Congress: Adaptation or Decline,” we will focus on Congress’ power in relationship to the President and its influence over the modern administrative state. In this context, I will explain my understanding of the “collective Congress.” The Constitution vests legislative power in Congress as a whole—individual lawmakers can exercise legislative power only by forming majorities (or sometimes supermajorities) to pass laws.
Collective lawmaking is a fundamental aspect of the structure of separation of powers. It reinforces that Congress can exercise (with a few specific exceptions) only legislative power. Individual representatives and senators have no separate power and are limited from controlling the execution of the laws.
I will explain how open-ended delegations to administrative agencies have eroded the collective Congress. The demise of any workable non-delegation doctrine means that significant discretion is given to agencies. Members of Congress can then influence and control that discretion through various formal and informal means. Delegation can be a way not only of increasing the power of the executive branch, but also of increasing the power of individual lawmakers.
This erodes constitutional accountability in a number of ways, including that it allows agencies (functionally) to make law and congressmen (functionally) to administer the laws. Through delegation, both branches can make rules and interpret them—turning the separation of powers on its head.
My comments will draw on my recent article, Administrative Collusion: How Delegation Diminishes the Collective Congress, 90 N.Y.U. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2015). I look forward, as always, to further discussions at the Convention.
Judge, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
Judge Rao was appointed to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in March 2019. She graduated from Yale College in 1995 and the University of Chicago Law School in 1999. Following graduation, she served as a law clerk to Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit and, in the 2001 October Term, as law clerk to Justice Clarence Thomas of the U.S. Supreme Court. Between her clerkships, Judge Rao served as counsel for nominations and constitutional law to the U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary. In 2002, she joined the international arbitration group of Clifford Chance LLP in London, England. From 2005-2006, she served as Special Assistant and Associate White House Counsel to President George W. Bush. From 2006 to 2017, Judge Rao was a professor at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, where she taught constitutional law, legislation and statutory interpretation, and the history and foundations of the administrative state. In 2014, she founded the Center for the Study of the Administrative State, a non-profit Center that promotes academic scholarship and public policy debates about administrative law. In July 2017, she was appointed to serve as the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management Budget. She served in this position until her appointment to the D.C. Circuit.