Minnesota Law Review

Administrative By Treasury

Although the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in theory regulates government policymaking, the agency that is both among the oldest and, as the financial crisis has revealed, one of the most important, does not play by its rules. The Treasury Department is rarely sued for its administrative procedure, makes fewer rules than do agencies that follow the APA more closely, and acts as if it is generally less bound by the nuances of process than do its peers.

In the Article, I examine the alternative administrative procedure that applies to the Treasury Department and illustrate the ways in which it does things differently. In some ways, the Department’s absence from the usual suspects of administrative oversight, including the Office of Management and Budget, the D.C. Circuit, and the Federal Register, suggest that Treasury is essentially acting as an unsupervised agency; many observers have concluded that the Treasury Department’s response to the financial crisis amounted to an abandonment of the usual safeguards we expect in the modern administrative state. But a closer examination indicates that Treasury simply operates under a different model, one informed by its form, its remit, and its tasks—but not, at least not much, by ordinary administrative procedure. Its constraints come more from Congress, from internal controls, and from the large, but understudied, private bar that interprets what it is doing, than from notice, comment, rulemaking, and litigation

:: View PDF

News & Events

  • Follow MLR on Twitter!

    The Minnesota Law Review is proud to announce that we are now on Twitter. Follow us @MinnesotaLawRev for information and updates concerning the petition period and deadlines, the opening and closing of article submissions, our 2014 Symposium: Offenders in the Community, and all other news concerning our authors and publications. [...]

  • Vol. 97 Lead Piece Cited in Al Jazeera Opinion Piece

    A recent Al Jazeera opinion piece that criticizes the Supreme Court’s Daimler decision cites to Volume 97′s lead piece, How Business Fares in the Supreme Court. You can read the Al Jazeera piece here.

  • Masthead for Volume 99 Board

    The masthead for the Board of Volume 99 of the Minnesota Law Review is now available. You can view the masthead here.

  • Above the Law Post Highlights MLR‘s Jump in Journal Rankings

    A recent post on Above the Law highlights the fact that the Minnesota Law Review was ranked 11th in the most recent 2013 edition of the Washington & Lee Law Review Rankings. You can read the post here.

  • Vol. 97 Lead Piece Cited on Slate

    A recent Slate article on the Supreme Court’s decision not to hear the “Moldy Washing Machine” cases, or overturn class certification of those cases in some circuits, cites to the Volume 97 Lead Piece, How Business Fares in the Supreme Court. You can read the article here.

Newsletter

cforms contact form by delicious:days