The Supreme Court's Goldilocks: Why the Major Questions Doctrine Is the Ideal Compromise Between Two Unattractive Extremes (Print Vol. 114 Issue 1)
The Supreme Court's Goldilocks: Why the Major Questions Doctrine Is the Ideal Compromise Between Two Unattractive Extremes
By: Bradley P. Simpson
University of Kentucky J. David Rosenberg College of Law student, Bradley Simpson, argues that the Major Questions Doctrine, notwithstanding its interpretive flaws, strikes an appealing balance between two extremes: an administrative state incapable of acting versus an administrative state left unchecked.