I have updated my prior posting on SSRN of my article titled: The Report of the Death of the Interpretive Regulation Is an Exaggeration. I did make some significant changes. The citation and the link in SSRN recommended format is
Townsend, John A., The Report of the Death of the Interpretive Regulation Is an Exaggeration (August 23, 2020). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3400489.
The significant revisions are:
- I provide more discussion to refute the notion that APA § 706 requires de novo review without deference to agency interpretations. (See pp. 74-76.) APA § 706 provides: “To the extent necessary to decision and when presented, the reviewing court shall decide all relevant questions of law, interpret constitutional and statutory provisions,”
- I add some more discussion on the anomaly of the spurious notion that when agencies interpret ambiguous statutory text they are legislating but when courts interpret ambiguous statutory text they are not legislating. (See pp. 59-60.)
- I significantly revised the opening discussion of the myth of tax exceptionalism. (See pp. 8-11; see also p. 110.) The argument is the same, but stated in a more logical way (I think).
I have made numerous other changes that I hope improve the article but the ones identified above are the significant changes.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. Jack Townsend will review and approve comments only to make sure the comments are appropriate. Although comments can be made anonymously, please identify yourself (either by real name or pseudonymn) so that, over a few comments, readers will be able to better judge whether to read the comments and respond to the comments.