Bringing the Non-Delegation Doctrine Back to the Supreme Court? A Moot and Discussion of Gundy v. United States with the Attorneys Arguing the Case
This October, Ms. Baumgartel will argue Gundy v. United States at the United States Supreme Court, a case involving the much-debated non-delegation doctrine.Briefs for the case can be found here (Gundy) and (United States).
For Constitution Day, Ms. Baumgartel will do a short moot of part of her Supreme Court argument with Professor Leon Friedman arguing for the U.S. and other Hofstra Law faculty serving as justices. Ms. Baumgartel and Mr. Zas will then conduct a broader discussion of the case and her experiences briefing the case and preparing for the upcoming Supreme Court oral argument.
The question before the Supreme Court in Gundy is whether SORNA’s delegation of authority to the U.S. Attorney General to retroactively impose the law’s registration requirements violates the nondelegation doctrine. This rarely invoked constitutional principle prohibits Congress from delegating away its lawmaking power without an adequate guiding principle to rein in the delegatee’s exercise of independent decision-making.
The case has broad-ranging implications for federal law and administrative agency authority. If the Court were to decide that the delegation here is unconstitutional, such a ruling might be used to call into question much of the enormous delegation of rule-making power contained in numerous other federal statutes that essentially enable the modern administrative state.
Baumgartel, Sarah; Friedman, Leon; and Zas, Edward S., "Bringing the Non-Delegation Doctrine Back to the Supreme Court? A Moot and Discussion of Gundy v. United States with the Attorneys Arguing the Case" (2018). Constitution Day Lectures. 4.