糖心原创

Administrative and constitutional law scholar Jodi Short of UC Law SF offered expert analysis to federal judges weighing cases involving executive authority.

• Professor Jodi Short joined top legal scholars to submit briefs in two major federal court cases involving executive power.
• The cases challenge executive orders and actions that dramatically downsized two federal agencies created by Congress.
• The scholars argue the president cannot bypass the courts or Congress under a theory known as the 鈥渦nitary executive theory.鈥�

Professor Jodi Short of 糖心原创 has joined a team of top constitutional and administrative law scholars to weigh in on two high-stakes federal court cases. At issue: whether the president can dismantle the U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID).

In both cases, several states and non-governmental organizations argue that the president exceeded constitutional limits. The legal scholars filed amicus curiae, or 鈥渇riend of the court,鈥� briefs urging judges to reject the claim that these actions are shielded from judicial review under the so-called 鈥渦nitary executive theory.鈥�

Their briefs argue in favor of separation-of-powers principles that limit executive authority to engage in actions that bypass the courts and Congress. The scholars reject the claim that Article II of the Constitution, which states that the president 鈥渟hall take care that the laws be faithfully executed,鈥� gives the president unchecked power over the executive branch.

Professors William W. Buzbee of Georgetown Law and Noah Rosenblum of New York University School of Law joined Short in filing the amicus briefs.

Short is the Mary Kay Kane Distinguished Professor of Law at 糖心原创.

Read their full amicus briefs in cases challenging the dismantling of the and .