Managing Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC
Michael Buschbacher is the managing partner of Boyden Gray PLLC. He represents public and private companies, trade associations, non-profits, and individuals in high-stakes litigation and administrative proceedings, with a particular focus on environmental and energy matters.
In addition to trial-level work, Mr. Buschbacher maintains an active appellate practice, both as merits counsel and as counsel for amici curiae. He has written amicus briefs quoted by the Seventh and Ninth Circuits. And his Supreme Court advocacy has been cited by The New Yorker, The New York Times, and E&E News. Mr. Buschbacher’s commentary on legal issues has been published in The Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, and The American Conservative.
Before joining the firm, Mr. Buschbacher served at the U.S. Department of Justice as counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division. There, he advised senior Department leadership, served as the lead attorney on several lawsuits, and helped draft policy memoranda for the Department on the proper scope and procedure for environmental enforcement. Prior to serving in the government, Mr. Buschbacher was an associate in the D.C. office of Sidley Austin.
Mr. Buschbacher is a former clerk to Judge Alice M. Batchelder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and to Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana.
Mr. Buschbacher holds a B.A. in Music and Germanic Studies from Indiana University and a J.D., magna cum laude, from Notre Dame Law School.
Associate, Covington
John Kendrick represents clients in antitrust matters before government agencies (both domestic and foreign) and in federal court. His experience includes complex, high-profile antitrust litigation spanning multiple jurisdictions. He also represents clients in antitrust investigations, including merger investigations under the HSR Act.
John has advised clients in the cellular, medical device, retail, semiconductor, and travel industries. He has particular experience handling complex issues for technology companies and intellectual property licensing companies.
Angus G. Wynne, Sr. Professor in Civil Jurisprudence, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
Susan Morse joined the University of Texas law faculty in 2013. She studies and writes about regulatory design and about international tax policy and tax compliance. She is interested in the interaction between legal systems and private ordering.
Recent writings in tax policy include Do Tax Compliance Robots Follow the Law? (symposium contribution), 16 Ohio State Tech. L. J. 278 (2020); GILTI: The Co-operative Potential of a Unilateral Minimum Tax, 2019 British Tax Rev. 512; Does Parenting Matter? U.S. Firms, Non-U.S. Firms, and Global Tax Accruals (with Eric J. Allen), 4 J. L. Fin. & Acct'g 239 (2019); International Cooperation and the 2017 Tax Act, 128 Yale L. J. Forum 362 (Oct. 25, 2018) and Seeking Comparable Transactions in Patent and Tax, 37 Rev. Litig. Brief (2018).
Recent writings in regulatory design include Government-to-Robot Enforcement, 2019 Ill. L. Rev. 1497; When Robots Make Legal Mistakes, 72 Okla. L. Rev. 213 (2019); Regulating by Example, 35 Yale J. Reg. 127 (2018) (with Leigh Osofsky) (featured in online symposium, How Agencies Communicate, at JREG); Safe Harbors, Sure Shipwrecks, 49 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1385 (2016) (selected for Yale/Stanford/Harvard Junior Faculty Forum, 2015); and Entrepreneurship Incentives for Resource-Constrained Firms, Handbook of Law and Entrepreneurship (forthcoming).
Morse cowrote a Supreme Court amicus brief in 2020 supporting the government in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service (blog coverage here). Morse submitted cowritten Ninth Circuit amicus briefs in 2016, 2018 and 2019 in Altera Corp. v. Commissioner, supporting the government's position that it had validly issued a Treasury regulation that requires cost-sharing arrangements to include stock-based compensation. The Ninth Circuit held for the government and denied rehearing en banc, and the Supreme Court denied cert in 2020. Blog coverage here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Professor Morse teaches Property and Federal Income Tax, as well as the Financial Methods for Lawyers course, which she pioneered at Texas Law. She won the Women's Law Caucus Teacher of the Year award in 2016 and 2020. She edits the tax section at JOTWELL.com.
Professor Morse clerked for the Honorable Michael Boudin of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and spent seven years in business tax practice at Ropes & Gray, Boston and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Palo Alto. Prior to joining the Texas faculty, she served as Associate Professor at UC Hastings College of the Law and as Research Assistant Professor at Santa Clara University School of Law.
Morse has also written Innovation and Taxation at Start-Up Firms, 69 Tax L. Rev. 357 (2016); Tax Anti-Avoidance Law in Australia and the United States, 49 Int'l Law. 111 (2015); A Simpler Offshore Profits Transition Tax, 76 Tax Notes Int'l 629 (Feb. 17, 2014); Startup Ltd.: Tax Planning and Initial Incorporation, 14 Fla. Tax Rev. 319 (2013); Tax Haven Incorporation for U.S. Firms: No Exodus Yet, 66 Nat’l Tax J. 395 (2013); The Transfer Pricing Regs Need a Good Edit, 40 Pepperdine L. Rev. 1415 (2013); and A Corporate Offshore Profits Transition Tax, 91 N.C. L. Rev. 549 (2013).
Senior Fellow in Executive Power, Cato Institute
Molly Nixon is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, where she focuses on the scope, use, and history of executive power as well as its limits under the Constitution. Molly was previously an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation’s separation of powers practice, where she litigated cases challenging congressional delegations of legislative power and executive branch overreach. Before that, she served as an Attorney-Advisor at the Department of the Interior and as Legislative Counsel for Congressman Justin Amash.
Molly holds a J.D. from New York University School of Law and a B.A. in History and International Relations from Boston University. She clerked for the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska and practiced law at a firm in New York City for several years before moving to Washington, D.C.
Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
John F. Duffy is the Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law and Class of 1966 Research Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law, where he teaches administrative law, torts and intellectual property. Professor Duffy has published articles on a wide range of administrative law and regulatory issues in journals such as University of Chicago Law Review, Yale Law Journal, Stanford Law Review, Virginia Law Review, Columbia Law Review, Texas Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, NYU Law Review, University of Pennsylvania Law Review and the Supreme Court Review. His 1998 article Administrative Common Law in Judicial Review, 77 Tex. L. Rev. 113 (1998), was one of the first articles to criticize the Chevron doctrine as being irreconcilable with § 706 of the APA; it won the American Bar Association’s Scholarship Award in Administrative Law. His 2008 article “Are Administrative Patent Judges Unconstitutional?” was covered on National Public Radio), in the New York Times (Adam Liptak, In One Flaw, Questions on Validity of 46 Judges, May 6, 2008), and in the Wall Street Journal (Dan Slater, Patently Unconstitutional, May 6, 2008). The NYT and WSJ agreed that he was “a different kind of law professor,” “one of the lucky few” whose “writings actually wind up changing the law.”
As an attorney in the courts, Duffy has twice successfully convinced the Supreme Court to overturn lower court doctrines that had been applied in many cases over decades but that were unanimously held to be irreconcilable with Supreme Court precedents. See TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, 581 U.S. 258 (2017); KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Prior to entering legal academics, Duffy clerked on the D.C. Circuit for Stephen Williams and on the Supreme Court for Antonin Scalia. While clerking, he became known as Justice Scalia’s “hapless law clerk,” who had been tasked with unearthing three-quarters of a century of legislative history that made “no difference” to the outcome in an otherwise forgettable case. See Conroy v. Aniskoff, 507 U.S. 511, 527-28 (1993) (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment).
In earlier days, Duffy enjoyed being a professional blackjack player unwelcome in all Atlantic City casinos and a semi-professional road runner (best marathon time 2:24:33). He holds an A.B. in physics from Harvard and a J.D. from the University of Chicago.
Managing Partner, Boyden Gray PLLC
Michael Buschbacher is the managing partner of Boyden Gray PLLC. He represents public and private companies, trade associations, non-profits, and individuals in high-stakes litigation and administrative proceedings, with a particular focus on environmental and energy matters.
In addition to trial-level work, Mr. Buschbacher maintains an active appellate practice, both as merits counsel and as counsel for amici curiae. He has written amicus briefs quoted by the Seventh and Ninth Circuits. And his Supreme Court advocacy has been cited by The New Yorker, The New York Times, and E&E News. Mr. Buschbacher’s commentary on legal issues has been published in The Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, and The American Conservative.
Before joining the firm, Mr. Buschbacher served at the U.S. Department of Justice as counsel to the Assistant Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division. There, he advised senior Department leadership, served as the lead attorney on several lawsuits, and helped draft policy memoranda for the Department on the proper scope and procedure for environmental enforcement. Prior to serving in the government, Mr. Buschbacher was an associate in the D.C. office of Sidley Austin.
Mr. Buschbacher is a former clerk to Judge Alice M. Batchelder of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and to Magistrate Judge Paul R. Cherry of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana.
Mr. Buschbacher holds a B.A. in Music and Germanic Studies from Indiana University and a J.D., magna cum laude, from Notre Dame Law School.
Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
John F. Duffy is the Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law and Class of 1966 Research Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law, where he teaches administrative law, torts and intellectual property. Professor Duffy has published articles on a wide range of administrative law and regulatory issues in journals such as University of Chicago Law Review, Yale Law Journal, Stanford Law Review, Virginia Law Review, Columbia Law Review, Texas Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, NYU Law Review, University of Pennsylvania Law Review and the Supreme Court Review. His 1998 article Administrative Common Law in Judicial Review, 77 Tex. L. Rev. 113 (1998), was one of the first articles to criticize the Chevron doctrine as being irreconcilable with § 706 of the APA; it won the American Bar Association’s Scholarship Award in Administrative Law. His 2008 article “Are Administrative Patent Judges Unconstitutional?” was covered on National Public Radio), in the New York Times (Adam Liptak, In One Flaw, Questions on Validity of 46 Judges, May 6, 2008), and in the Wall Street Journal (Dan Slater, Patently Unconstitutional, May 6, 2008). The NYT and WSJ agreed that he was “a different kind of law professor,” “one of the lucky few” whose “writings actually wind up changing the law.”
As an attorney in the courts, Duffy has twice successfully convinced the Supreme Court to overturn lower court doctrines that had been applied in many cases over decades but that were unanimously held to be irreconcilable with Supreme Court precedents. See TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, 581 U.S. 258 (2017); KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Prior to entering legal academics, Duffy clerked on the D.C. Circuit for Stephen Williams and on the Supreme Court for Antonin Scalia. While clerking, he became known as Justice Scalia’s “hapless law clerk,” who had been tasked with unearthing three-quarters of a century of legislative history that made “no difference” to the outcome in an otherwise forgettable case. See Conroy v. Aniskoff, 507 U.S. 511, 527-28 (1993) (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment).
In earlier days, Duffy enjoyed being a professional blackjack player unwelcome in all Atlantic City casinos and a semi-professional road runner (best marathon time 2:24:33). He holds an A.B. in physics from Harvard and a J.D. from the University of Chicago.
Associate, Covington
John Kendrick represents clients in antitrust matters before government agencies (both domestic and foreign) and in federal court. His experience includes complex, high-profile antitrust litigation spanning multiple jurisdictions. He also represents clients in antitrust investigations, including merger investigations under the HSR Act.
John has advised clients in the cellular, medical device, retail, semiconductor, and travel industries. He has particular experience handling complex issues for technology companies and intellectual property licensing companies.
Angus G. Wynne, Sr. Professor in Civil Jurisprudence, The University of Texas at Austin School of Law
Susan Morse joined the University of Texas law faculty in 2013. She studies and writes about regulatory design and about international tax policy and tax compliance. She is interested in the interaction between legal systems and private ordering.
Recent writings in tax policy include Do Tax Compliance Robots Follow the Law? (symposium contribution), 16 Ohio State Tech. L. J. 278 (2020); GILTI: The Co-operative Potential of a Unilateral Minimum Tax, 2019 British Tax Rev. 512; Does Parenting Matter? U.S. Firms, Non-U.S. Firms, and Global Tax Accruals (with Eric J. Allen), 4 J. L. Fin. & Acct'g 239 (2019); International Cooperation and the 2017 Tax Act, 128 Yale L. J. Forum 362 (Oct. 25, 2018) and Seeking Comparable Transactions in Patent and Tax, 37 Rev. Litig. Brief (2018).
Recent writings in regulatory design include Government-to-Robot Enforcement, 2019 Ill. L. Rev. 1497; When Robots Make Legal Mistakes, 72 Okla. L. Rev. 213 (2019); Regulating by Example, 35 Yale J. Reg. 127 (2018) (with Leigh Osofsky) (featured in online symposium, How Agencies Communicate, at JREG); Safe Harbors, Sure Shipwrecks, 49 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 1385 (2016) (selected for Yale/Stanford/Harvard Junior Faculty Forum, 2015); and Entrepreneurship Incentives for Resource-Constrained Firms, Handbook of Law and Entrepreneurship (forthcoming).
Morse cowrote a Supreme Court amicus brief in 2020 supporting the government in CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service (blog coverage here). Morse submitted cowritten Ninth Circuit amicus briefs in 2016, 2018 and 2019 in Altera Corp. v. Commissioner, supporting the government's position that it had validly issued a Treasury regulation that requires cost-sharing arrangements to include stock-based compensation. The Ninth Circuit held for the government and denied rehearing en banc, and the Supreme Court denied cert in 2020. Blog coverage here, here, here, here, here, and here.
Professor Morse teaches Property and Federal Income Tax, as well as the Financial Methods for Lawyers course, which she pioneered at Texas Law. She won the Women's Law Caucus Teacher of the Year award in 2016 and 2020. She edits the tax section at JOTWELL.com.
Professor Morse clerked for the Honorable Michael Boudin of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit and spent seven years in business tax practice at Ropes & Gray, Boston and Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, Palo Alto. Prior to joining the Texas faculty, she served as Associate Professor at UC Hastings College of the Law and as Research Assistant Professor at Santa Clara University School of Law.
Morse has also written Innovation and Taxation at Start-Up Firms, 69 Tax L. Rev. 357 (2016); Tax Anti-Avoidance Law in Australia and the United States, 49 Int'l Law. 111 (2015); A Simpler Offshore Profits Transition Tax, 76 Tax Notes Int'l 629 (Feb. 17, 2014); Startup Ltd.: Tax Planning and Initial Incorporation, 14 Fla. Tax Rev. 319 (2013); Tax Haven Incorporation for U.S. Firms: No Exodus Yet, 66 Nat’l Tax J. 395 (2013); The Transfer Pricing Regs Need a Good Edit, 40 Pepperdine L. Rev. 1415 (2013); and A Corporate Offshore Profits Transition Tax, 91 N.C. L. Rev. 549 (2013).
Senior Fellow in Executive Power, Cato Institute
Molly Nixon is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, where she focuses on the scope, use, and history of executive power as well as its limits under the Constitution. Molly was previously an attorney with Pacific Legal Foundation’s separation of powers practice, where she litigated cases challenging congressional delegations of legislative power and executive branch overreach. Before that, she served as an Attorney-Advisor at the Department of the Interior and as Legislative Counsel for Congressman Justin Amash.
Molly holds a J.D. from New York University School of Law and a B.A. in History and International Relations from Boston University. She clerked for the U.S. District Court for the District of Alaska and practiced law at a firm in New York City for several years before moving to Washington, D.C.
Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law
John F. Duffy is the Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law and Class of 1966 Research Professor of Law at the University of Virginia School of Law, where he teaches administrative law, torts and intellectual property. Professor Duffy has published articles on a wide range of administrative law and regulatory issues in journals such as University of Chicago Law Review, Yale Law Journal, Stanford Law Review, Virginia Law Review, Columbia Law Review, Texas Law Review, Northwestern University Law Review, NYU Law Review, University of Pennsylvania Law Review and the Supreme Court Review. His 1998 article Administrative Common Law in Judicial Review, 77 Tex. L. Rev. 113 (1998), was one of the first articles to criticize the Chevron doctrine as being irreconcilable with § 706 of the APA; it won the American Bar Association’s Scholarship Award in Administrative Law. His 2008 article “Are Administrative Patent Judges Unconstitutional?” was covered on National Public Radio), in the New York Times (Adam Liptak, In One Flaw, Questions on Validity of 46 Judges, May 6, 2008), and in the Wall Street Journal (Dan Slater, Patently Unconstitutional, May 6, 2008). The NYT and WSJ agreed that he was “a different kind of law professor,” “one of the lucky few” whose “writings actually wind up changing the law.”
As an attorney in the courts, Duffy has twice successfully convinced the Supreme Court to overturn lower court doctrines that had been applied in many cases over decades but that were unanimously held to be irreconcilable with Supreme Court precedents. See TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, 581 U.S. 258 (2017); KSR v. Teleflex, 550 U.S. 398 (2007).
Prior to entering legal academics, Duffy clerked on the D.C. Circuit for Stephen Williams and on the Supreme Court for Antonin Scalia. While clerking, he became known as Justice Scalia’s “hapless law clerk,” who had been tasked with unearthing three-quarters of a century of legislative history that made “no difference” to the outcome in an otherwise forgettable case. See Conroy v. Aniskoff, 507 U.S. 511, 527-28 (1993) (Scalia, J., concurring in the judgment).
In earlier days, Duffy enjoyed being a professional blackjack player unwelcome in all Atlantic City casinos and a semi-professional road runner (best marathon time 2:24:33). He holds an A.B. in physics from Harvard and a J.D. from the University of Chicago.
Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law, Columbia Law School; CEO, New Civil Liberties Alliance
Philip Hamburger is the Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law at Columbia Law School, and Chief Executive Officer at the New Civil Liberties Alliance. Before coming to Columbia, he was the John P. Wilson Professor at the University of Chicago Law School.
He writes on constitutional law and its history—with particular emphasis on religious liberty, freedom of speech and the press, judicial office, administrative power, and unconstitutional conditions.
His books are Separation of Church and State (Harvard 2002), Law and Judicial Duty (Harvard 2008), Is Administrative Law Unlawful? (Chicago 2014), The Administrative Threat (Encounter 2017), and Liberal Suppression: Section 501(c)(3) and the Taxation of Speech (Chicago 2018). A forthcoming book is Purchasing Submission: Conditions, Power, and Freedom (Harvard 2021).
He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and he has served on the board of directors of the American Society for Legal History. He has twice received the Sutherland Prize for the most significant contribution to English legal history, and has been awarded the Henry Paolucci - Walter Bagehot Book Award, the Hayek Book Prize, and the Bradley Prize.
Associate Dean for Research and Intellectual Life, McKnight Presidential Professor in Law, Distinguished McKnight University Professor, Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, Associate Director, Corporate Institute, University of Minnesota Law School
Professor Kristin E. Hickman is the McKnight Presidential Professor in Law, a Distinguished McKnight University Professor, and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law at the University of Minnesota Law School. She also has taught at Harvard Law School and Northwestern University School of Law. Professor Hickman teaches and writes primarily in the areas of administrative law, tax administration, and statutory interpretation. Her articles on these topics have appeared in the Columbia Law Review, Cornell Law Review, Virginia Law Review, Duke Law Journal, and other publications. She also co-authors the Administrative Law Treatise with Richard J. Pierce, Jr., and a casebook on federal administrative law with Pierce and Christopher J. Walker. Her scholarly work has been cited several times in opinions of the United States Supreme Court as well as regularly in lower court judicial opinions and court briefs.
In 2018-19, Professor Hickman served as Special Adviser to the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in Washington, D.C. She presently serves as a Senior Fellow, and previously served as a public member and chair of the judicial review committee, for the Administrative Conference of the United States. She also is a Fellow of the American College of Tax Counsel.
Professor Hickman received her B.S. degree in business administration with a concentration in accounting and a secondary major in history from Trinity University in San Antonio, Texas. After practicing for several years as a certified public accountant, Professor Hickman earned her J.D. degree, magna cum laude, from Northwestern University School of Law, where she was awarded the Raoul Berger Prize and the Lowden Wigmore Prize for her scholarly writings. Following law school, Professor Hickman clerked for The Honorable David B. Sentelle of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and practiced law as an associate with the Chicago office of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, concentrating on corporate and international tax transactions and matters.
Deputy Secretary of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Judge Stephen Alexander Vaden was appointed as the Deputy Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture on July 7, 2025. Alongside Secretary Brooke L. Rollins, Deputy Secretary Vaden leads the Department’s operations and implements policies that support America’s food and farm systems. A native of Union City, Tennessee, Deputy Secretary Vaden brings expertise in agricultural policy, law, and rural development. Previously, he served as a judge on the U.S. Court of International Trade and as General Counsel of USDA. Throughout Deputy Secretary Vaden’s time as General Counsel, he led successful Supreme Court litigation, advanced regulatory reform, and supported the implementation of the 2018 Farm Bill. He is a graduate of Yale Law School and Vanderbilt University. A public servant with strong agricultural roots, Deputy Secretary Vaden is committed to revitalizing rural America and ensuring an abundant, affordable, and safe U.S. food supply.
Deputy Secretary of Transportation, US Department of Transportation
Steven G. Bradbury was sworn in as the Deputy Secretary of Transportation on March 13, 2025, following his confirmation by the U.S. Senate on March 11, 2025. In this role, he oversees the Department’s operating administrations and spearheads initiatives to ensure a safe, efficient, and modern transportation system that strengthens economic productivity and global competitiveness. Deputy Secretary Bradbury also assists Secretary Duffy in managing the Department’s activities, including its workforce of over 58,000 employees and an annual budget exceeding $109 billion.
Bradbury previously served as the 23rd General Counsel of the Department of Transportation from 2017 to 2021, as the Acting Deputy Secretary from 2019, and as Acting Secretary of Transportation in 2021. As General Counsel, he was the chief legal officer, advising on all legal matters and ensuring the integrity and compliance of the Department’s policies and programs.
Before rejoining DOT, Bradbury was a Distinguished Fellow at The Heritage Foundation from December 2022 to March 2025. He has extensive experience in the public and private sector, having served as Principal Deputy and Acting Assistant Attorney General at the U.S. Department of Justice and as a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and Dechert LLP. Earlier in his career, he clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas and Judge James L. Buckley.
Bradbury holds a J.D., magna cum laude, from the University of Michigan Law School and a B.A. in English from Stanford University.
Professor of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School
Emily Bremer teaches and writes in the areas of administrative law, regulatory process, and civil procedure. Her scholarship focuses primarily on matters of procedural design, with a recent focus on the history and interpretation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). She is a recipient of the AALS’s award for the year’s best administrative law scholarship by a junior scholar and the AALL’s Joseph L. Andrew’s Legal Literature Award for her contribution to the Bremer-Kovacs Collection of Historical Documents Related to the APA (HeinOnline). Bremer’s articles include a defense forthcoming in the Virginia Law Review of the constitutionality of the APA’s regime for ensuring the competence and impartiality of Administrative Law Judges; a plea in the Yale Journal on Regulation for administrative law to take greater account of the on-the-ground reality of administration; twin articles uncovering the intellectual foundation and meaning of the APA’s adjudication and rulemaking provisions; and three separate studies that served as the basis of recommendations of the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) on the subjects of agency declaratory orders, incorporation by reference, and statutory limitations on the jurisdiction of the Court of Federal Claims. Bremer serves as a Senior Fellow of ACUS, a co-editor of the administrative law section of Jotwell, and a regular contributor to the Yale Journal on Regulation’s Notice & Comment blog.
William R. Orthwein Distinguished Professor of Law, Washington University in St. Louis School of Law
Professor Ronald M. Levin is a nationally known scholar who specializes in administrative law and related public law issues. He is the co-author of a casebook on state and federal administrative law, now in its third edition, as well as a nutshell on administrative law and process, now in its fifth edition. Formerly the law school's associate dean, he has published numerous articles and book chapters on administrative law topics, including judicial review, rulemaking, and legislative reform of the regulatory process. He also has written about the law of legislation, lobbying, and legislative ethics. Among his professional affiliations, Professor Levin has chaired the ABA Section of Administrative Law and Regulatory Practice and served as the ABA's advisor to the drafting committee to revise the Model State Administrative Procedure Act. He also has chaired the Section on Administrative Law and the Section on Legislation of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS). Currently a public member of the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), he previously served as a consultant to ACUS and to the Supreme Court of Indonesia. Before joining the law faculty, Professor Levin clerked for the Hon. John C. Godbold, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, and practiced for three years in Washington, D.C., with the firm of Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan.
Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit
Judge Menashi was appointed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on November 14, 2019. Previously, he served as special assistant and associate counsel to the President in the White House and as acting general counsel at the U.S. Department of Education. He was assistant professor of law at Scalia Law School, George Mason University, where he taught administrative law and civil procedure, and a research fellow at New York University School of Law and Georgetown University Law Center. He was also a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP in New York, where he practiced appellate and commercial litigation, and served as a law clerk to Justice Samuel Alito on the Supreme Court of the United States and to Judge Douglas Ginsburg on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He graduated from Stanford Law School, where he was elected to Order of the Coif and served as senior articles editor of the Stanford Law Review, and from Dartmouth College, where he was elected to Phi Beta Kappa.
Andrew Tutt focuses on Supreme Court, appellate, and complex litigation. He has won cases in federal courts across a broad cross-section of subjects, with particular experience in administrative law, intellectual property law, and civil rights law. He has argued and won three cases in the United States Supreme Court, led appeals in the First, Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, and D.C. Circuits and led the strategy, briefing, and argument in complex cases in federal district courts nationwide.
Recently, Andrew argued and won a significant victory in the United States Supreme Court establishing an important structural constitutional principle and safeguarding the reemployment rights of thousands of veterans and servicemembers. The Court took the rare step of granting certiorari to a state intermediate court of appeals, without a circuit conflict, over the Solicitor Generals recommendation that the Court deny the case.
In another recent matter before the United States Supreme Court, Andrew identified a meritorious pro se petition for certiorari. Representing the petitioner pro bono, Andrew and a team of Arnold & Porter attorneys persuaded the United States Supreme Court to grant the petition, securing reversal and his clients release from federal custody.
In a recent case, Andrew persuaded the Fourth Circuit to recognize that livestreaming police officers in the discharge of their duties is First Amendment protected activity.
In another recent case, Andrew convinced the Tenth Circuit to join six other federal courts of appeals in recognizing that individuals have a clearly established First Amendment right to record police officers in the discharge of their duties in public subject only to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions.
In another case, Andrew persuaded the Fourth Circuit that a federal district court fundamentally misapprehended the evidence and arguments in a high-stakes bench trial, winning, on clear error review, a reversal and remand with instructions to enter judgment in favor of his client.
In another case in the Fourth Circuit, Andrew won a preliminary injunction and summary judgment for the City of Baltimore against changes to grant criteria used to award nearly US$300 million annually. On appeal, the Fourth Circuit granted initial hearing en banc, split with the en banc Ninth Circuit, and affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment on four independent grounds.
In the Ninth Circuit, Andrew successfully represented three federal grantees in a high-profile challenge to the criteria used to award US$100 million in annual federal grants. Andrew persuaded the court of appeals to reverse the district court's dismissal for lack of jurisdiction and exercise its discretion to reach the merits and strike down the unlawful award criteria in light of the case's "national impact."
Deep Dive Episode 287 - Courthouse Steps Oral Argument: Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Michael Buschbacher, John Kendrick, Susan C. Morse, Molly Nixon, John F. Duffy
On February 20, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Corner Post,...
Courthouse Steps Oral Argument: Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Michael Buschbacher, John F. Duffy, John Kendrick, Susan C. Morse, Molly Nixon
On February 20, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Corner Post,...
Chevron Under Review: Courthouse Steps Preview: Loper Bright & Relentless
John F. Duffy, Philip A. Hamburger, Kristin E. Hickman, Stephen Alexander Vaden
Chevron v. NRDC (1984) and subsequent precedents held that courts should defer to agency interpretations...
The Administrative State, Its Supporters and Its Discontents
Steven Gill Bradbury, Emily Bremer, Ronald M. Levin, Steven J. Menashi, Andrew Tutt
The administrative state - the agencies comprising the Executive Branch of the U.S. federal government...
Topics
Morrison v. Olson Oral Argument Rewind: Everything Old Is New Again
Historian-turned-politician Sen. Ben Sasse (NE) likes a good historical coincidence. And last week, on April...