
In this episode of Unwritten Law, NCLA Senior Litigation Counsel John Vecchione is joined by Staff Counsel Christian Clase to discuss a remarkable concurrence by Justice Clarence Thomas in a recent Supreme Court case involving Roundup, pesticide regulation, and federal preemption.Although the Court's decision focused on whether federal law preempts state-law failure-to-warn claims, Justice Thomas used his concurrence to highlight a much broader set of constitutional concerns. His opinion raises questions about Congress's Commerce Clause authority, the constitutionality of broad delegations of power to administrative agencies, and whether federal agency actions should be capable of preempting state law at all.John and Christian examine Thomas's critique of modern administrative governance, including his concern that agencies can effectively create rules carrying civil and criminal consequences while exercising powers traditionally reserved to Congress.The discussion also explores Thomas's argument that agency action does not fit neatly within the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, why he views administrative preemption as constitutionally suspect, and how his opinion may serve as a roadmap for future constitutional challenges.The episode offers a deep dive into one of the most important administrative law concurrences of the term and what it could mean for the future of agency power.
Podzilla Summary coming soon
Sign up to get notified when the full AI-powered summary is ready.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.

Should SCOTUS Revisit Its 120-Year-Old Vaccine Precedent?

Can the Government Escape Accountability for Censorship?

Can Agency Commentary Increase Your Prison Sentence?

SCOTUS Special (Part 3): A Major Win for Digital Privacy
Free AI-powered recaps of Unwritten Law and your other favorite podcasts, delivered to your inbox.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.