The Administrative State and the Conservative Legal Renaissance
From unelected bureaucrats at the EPA to sprawling regulatory frameworks under HHS, the federal administrative state has become the dominant lawmaking force in American life—despite lacking any clear constitutional mandate.
For decades, courts granted agencies broad deference under doctrines like Chevron and Auer, often treating agency interpretations as gospel unless “unreasonable.” This has emboldened bureaucracies to redefine statutes and impose sweeping rules far beyond congressional intent.
The tide is now turning. The Supreme Court’s growing skepticism of agency authority—exemplified in West Virginia v. EPA—signals a shift toward reining in this shadow government. Conservative legal scholars and advocates are leading the charge to restore the separation of powers and return lawmaking to elected legislators.
Our work contributes to this renaissance by advancing litigation that targets regulatory overreach and demands judicial engagement. We train clients to anticipate regulatory threats, and we publish legal frameworks that challenge the legitimacy of unchecked delegation.
The fight against the administrative state is not anti-government. It is pro-constitutional order—an insistence that liberty must not be traded for bureaucratic convenience.