法庭之友克里斯汀·e·希克曼教授支持被告,美国诉Home Concrete & Supply, LLC案摘要(美国最高法院)

Kristin E. Hickman
{"title":"法庭之友克里斯汀·e·希克曼教授支持被告,美国诉Home Concrete & Supply, LLC案摘要(美国最高法院)","authors":"Kristin E. Hickman","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1989098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in United States Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, No. 11-139, to discuss two issues raised by the procedures used by the Treasury Department in adopting Treas. Reg. 301.6501(e)-1, at issue in the case: (1) whether Treas. Reg. 301.6501(e)-1 is procedurally invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act in light of Treasury's use of interim-final rulemaking with only post-promulgation notice and comment and without a contemporaneous assertion of good cause; and (2) whether a procedurally invalid Treasury regulation can be eligible for Chevron deference. The brief summarizes and expands upon issues raised and arguments made in some of my previous scholarship.","PeriodicalId":341363,"journal":{"name":"Administrative Law eJournal","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Brief of Amicus Curiae Professor Kristin E. Hickman in Support of Respondents, United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC (United States Supreme Court)\",\"authors\":\"Kristin E. Hickman\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1989098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in United States Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, No. 11-139, to discuss two issues raised by the procedures used by the Treasury Department in adopting Treas. Reg. 301.6501(e)-1, at issue in the case: (1) whether Treas. Reg. 301.6501(e)-1 is procedurally invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act in light of Treasury's use of interim-final rulemaking with only post-promulgation notice and comment and without a contemporaneous assertion of good cause; and (2) whether a procedurally invalid Treasury regulation can be eligible for Chevron deference. The brief summarizes and expands upon issues raised and arguments made in some of my previous scholarship.\",\"PeriodicalId\":341363,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Administrative Law eJournal\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Administrative Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1989098\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Administrative Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1989098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本“法庭之友”摘要提交给美国最高法院,该案涉及美国家庭混凝土供应有限责任公司,第11-139号,旨在讨论财政部在采用税收法案时所使用的程序所引起的两个问题。Reg. 301.6501(e)-1,在该案件中存在争议:(1)Treas是否。根据《行政程序法》,第301.6501(e)-1号条例在程序上无效,因为财政部使用临时最终规则制定,仅发布后通知和评论,且没有同时提出正当理由的主张;(2)程序无效的财政部法规是否有资格获得雪佛龙的服从。摘要总结并扩展了在我以前的一些学术研究中提出的问题和论点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Brief of Amicus Curiae Professor Kristin E. Hickman in Support of Respondents, United States v. Home Concrete & Supply, LLC (United States Supreme Court)
This amicus brief was filed before the United States Supreme Court in United States Home Concrete & Supply, LLC, No. 11-139, to discuss two issues raised by the procedures used by the Treasury Department in adopting Treas. Reg. 301.6501(e)-1, at issue in the case: (1) whether Treas. Reg. 301.6501(e)-1 is procedurally invalid under the Administrative Procedure Act in light of Treasury's use of interim-final rulemaking with only post-promulgation notice and comment and without a contemporaneous assertion of good cause; and (2) whether a procedurally invalid Treasury regulation can be eligible for Chevron deference. The brief summarizes and expands upon issues raised and arguments made in some of my previous scholarship.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信