The Permit Power Revisited: The Theory and Practice of Regulatory Permits in the Administrative State

Two decades ago, Professor Richard Epstein fired a shot at the administrative state that has gone largely unanswered in legal scholarship. His target was the permit power, under which legislatures prohibit a specified activity by statute and delegate to administrative agencies the discretionary power to authorize the activity under terms the agency mandates in a regulatory permit. Accurately describing the permit power as an enormous power in the state, Epstein bemoaned that it had received scant attention in the academic literature. He sought to fill that gap. Centered on the premise that the permit power represents a complete inversion of the proper distribution of power within a legal system, Epstein launched a scathing critique of regulatory permitting in operation, condemning it as a racket for administrative abuses and excesses. Epstein\u27s assessment of the permit power was and remains accurate in three respects: it is vast in scope, it is ripe for administrative abuse, and it has been largely ignored in legal scholarship. The problem is that, beyond what he got right about the permit power, most of Epstein\u27s critique was based on an incomplete caricature of permitting in theory and practice. This Article is the first to return comprehensively to the permit power since Epstein\u27s critique, offering a deep account of the theory and practice of regulatory permits in the administrative state. This Article opens by defining the various types of regulatory permits and describing the scope of permitting in the regulatory state. From there it compares different permit design approaches and explores the advantages of general permits, including their ability to mitigate many of the concerns Epstein advanced. This Article then applies a theoretical model to environmental degradation problems and concludes that if certain conditions are met, general permits can effectively respond to many of the complex policy problems of the future. Finally, this Article adds to the scholarship initiated by Epstein by proposing a set of default rules and exceptions for permit design and suggesting how they apply to complex policy problems

Health Reform 2007: Impact on the Valley

Provides a summary of California's health reform debate, background information on recent legislative action, and an overview of the major healthcare proposals pending in the state

The Influence of Commercial Intent of Search Results on Their Perceived Relevance

We carried out a retrieval effectiveness test on the three major web search engines (i.e., Google, Microsoft and Yahoo). In addition to relevance judgments, we classified the results according to their commercial intent and whether or not they carried any advertising. We found that all search engines provide a large number of results with a commercial intent. Google provides significantly more commercial results than the other search engines do. However, the commercial intent of a result did not influence jurors in their relevance judgments

Cotton, Clemency, and Control: United States v. Klein and the Juridical Legacy of Executive Pardon

When the guns of war fell silent in 1865, Americans throughout the reunited states grappled with the logistics of peace. At virtually every turn lay nebulous but critical questions of race, class, allegiance, and identity. More pragmatic legal stumbling blocks could also be found strewn across the path to Reconstruction; some of them would ensnare the healing nation for decades to come. Among their number was notorious Supreme Court decision United States v. Klein (1872). Born on July 22, 1865 out of a small debate over the wartime seizure of Vicksburg cotton stores, Klein quickly evolved into a legal behemoth. In its tangles with the separation of powers, the presidential power of pardon, and the supremacy of the executive in judicial matters, United States v. Klein would ultimately amount to the very poster child of the snowball effect at work in Reconstruction law. Widely forgotten or overlooked today, the decision of United States v. Klein nonetheless stands as one of the most crucial battles of the American Civil War era

Just a Soul Whose Intentions Are Good? The Relevance of a Defendant\u27s Subjective Intent in Defining a “Destructive Device” Under the National Firearms Act

This Note addresses the three-way circuit split among the U.S. Courts of Appeals over when, and to what extent, a court may consider a defendant\u27s subjective intent in defining a destructive device under the National Firearms Act. The circuit split centers on the Act\u27s ambiguous reference to intent in its definition of a destructive device, which is a statutorily prohibited firearm. After discussing the Act\u27s legislative history and development, this Note considers the role of mens rea in National Firearms Act cases. It next addresses the disagreement among the Courts of Appeals, first detailing three cases that give rise to the disagreement and then discussing additional cases which support each position. Finally, this Note argues that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit\u27s view, espousing a generally objective approach and eschewing a consideration of a defendant\u27s intent outside of a small range of cases, is most consistent with legisl ative history, statutory interpretation, and common sense

Evaluating the retrieval effectiveness of Web search engines using a representative query sample

Search engine retrieval effectiveness studies are usually small-scale, using only limited query samples. Furthermore, queries are selected by the researchers. We address these issues by taking a random representative sample of 1,000 informational and 1,000 navigational queries from a major German search engine and comparing Google's and Bing's results based on this sample. Jurors were found through crowdsourcing, data was collected using specialised software, the Relevance Assessment Tool (RAT). We found that while Google outperforms Bing in both query types, the difference in the performance for informational queries was rather low. However, for navigational queries, Google found the correct answer in 95.3 per cent of cases whereas Bing only found the correct answer 76.6 per cent of the time. We conclude that search engine performance on navigational queries is of great importance, as users in this case can clearly identify queries that have returned correct results. So, performance on this query type may contribute to explaining user satisfaction with search engines