Skip to main content

2020 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

6. Gundy v. U.S. on Delegation of Power

verfasst von : Gary Lawson

Erschienen in: SCOTUS 2019

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

One of the core principles of the US Constitution is separation of powers, the belief that ambition must be counteracted with ambition so that too much authority is not concentrated in the hands of a few. This includes the principle of non-delegation that the powers held by one branch of government must not be given to another, even when done voluntarily. Gundy presents the question of whether Congress gave away too much authority to the Department of Justice to determine who is put on the federal sex offender registry. Does this violate the principle that those who make the laws (Congress) must not also be those who prosecute the offenders (DOJ)? Have those functions been combined in a way that will lead to abuse? Gundy applies to sex offenders, but the principle of non-delegation has become an important question that will influence many future decisions of the Court.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
See Gary Lawson and Guy Seidman, “A Great Power of Attorney”: Understanding the Fiduciary Constitution (Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas, 2017), pages 118–122.
 
2
Act of July 22, 1790, ch. XXXIII, § 1, 1 Stat. 137.
 
3
Wayman v. Southard, 23 U.S. (10 Wheat.) 1 (1825).
 
4
See United States v. L. Cohen Grocery Store Co., 255 U.S. 81 (1921).
 
5
See Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Stewart, 253 U.S. 149 (1920).
 
6
A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935), at 541.
 
7
See National Broadcasting Co. v. United States, 319 U.S. 190 (1943); Yakus v. United States, 321 U.S. 414 (1944); American Power & Light Co. v. SEC, 329 U.S. 90 (1946).
 
8
Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361 (1989), at 416 (Scalia dissent).
 
9
Justice Scalia dissented on a technical ground involving the particular agency at issue, but he agreed fully with the majority’s general approach to delegation questions.
 
10
Mistretta, 488 U.S. at 372.
 
11
James Landis, The Administrative Process (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1938), page 2.
 
12
34 U.S.C. § 20913(d) (2012).
 
13
Gundy plurality, page 1.
 
14
Ibid., page 17.
 
15
Gundy Alito concurrence, page 1.
 
16
Gundy Gorsuch dissent, pages 26–27.
 
Metadaten
Titel
Gundy v. U.S. on Delegation of Power
verfasst von
Gary Lawson
Copyright-Jahr
2020
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29956-9_6