Pairings for Hickman, Pierce & Walker, Federal Administrative Law: Cases and Materials (4th ed. 2023)

Section A: The Study of Administrative Law
→ Why We Need the Administrative State — covers the policy rationale for the administrative state and the basic case for studying administrative law.

Section B: What Is an Agency? (CREW v. Office of Administration, executive/independent distinction)
→ Independent vs. Executive Agencies — covers the structural distinction and why it matters.
→ Delegation of Power Explained — covers how Congress creates agencies and vests them with authority.

Section C: The History of Administrative Law
→ Why We Need the Administrative State — covers the New Deal era and the modern period’s pressures on the administrative state.
→ Trump v. Slaughter Explained: The Case That Ended Independent Agencies — brings “the modern era” (Section C.5) current through the 2026 ruling that unsettled the Humphrey’s Executor framework.

Section A.1: The Nondelegation Doctrine (Panama Refining, Schechter, Benzene, Whitman, Michigan v. EPA, Gundy)
→ The Nondelegation Doctrine Explained — covers the full doctrinal arc, including the 1935 cases, the mid-century decline, and the Gundy revival.
→ The Intelligible Principle Explained — covers the test from J.W. Hampton through Whitman v. American Trucking.
→ Delegation of Power Explained — covers the general principle and why Congress delegates.

Section A.1.e: Subdelegation (Nou excerpt, US Telecom Ass’n)
→ Delegation of Power Explained — covers the general principle behind why subdelegation questions arise.

Section B: Delegating Adjudicatory Power (Crowell, Northern Pipeline, Schor, Granfinanciera)
→ Can a Federal Agency Fine You Without a Jury Trial? — covers Jarkesy’s doctrinal foundations, which build directly on the Schor / public-rights / private-rights framework.
→ Jarkesy Jumps to the FTC: Intuit v. FTC Explained — current application of the doctrine to the FTC’s adjudication scheme.

Section D.1: Due Process Limits on Congressional Power (Pillsbury v. FTC)
→ Due Process Explained — covers the baseline due process framework that applies to congressional meddling in pending adjudications.

Section A.1–4: Appointments (Buckley, Lucia, Morrison, Edmond, Arthrex, Freytag)
→ Independent vs. Executive Agencies — covers the structural setup that the Appointments Clause doctrines police.
→ The Removal Power — covers the appointment/removal link directly, including Arthrex and Lucia.

Section B: The Power to Remove (Myers through Seila Law)
→ The Removal Power — covers the doctrinal arc from Myers through Seila Law.
→ Trump v. Slaughter Explained — brings the Humphrey’s Executor line into 2026, which the casebook’s coverage anticipates but cannot fully address.

Section C.1: Youngstown and Presidential Authority
→ Two Executive Orders, Two Very Different Days in Court: Birthright Citizenship and Mail Voting — covers how presidential authority is tested through agencies, with current application to two 2025–26 executive orders.

Section C.2: Tools Presidents Use (EO 12866, OMB/OIRA, Strauss excerpt)
→ The podcast doesn’t yet have dedicated OIRA/EO 12866 coverage. Noted in gaps.

Section A.1.a: Londoner/Bi-Metallic
→ Rulemaking vs. Adjudication — covers the Londoner/Bi-Metallic distinction and its downstream procedural consequences.

Section A.1.b: Life, Liberty, or Property (Goldberg, Roth, Sindermann, Paul v. Davis, Kerry v. Din)
→ Due Process Explained — covers the shift from the right/privilege distinction to the modern framework.
→ Property Interests and What Counts as “Property” — covers Roth, Sindermann, and the entitlements framework.

Section A.2: Procedures Required by Due Process (Mathews, Loudermill)
→ The Mathews Balancing Test Explained — walks through the three-part test and its application.

Section B.1: Formal Adjudication (Dominion Energy)
→ The Adjudication Spectrum — covers when a formal hearing is triggered and what “formal” means.

Section B.2: Informal Adjudication (Overton Park, LTV)
→ The Lifecycle of an Administrative Case — walks through an administrative adjudication from start to finish.
→ The Administrative Record Explained — covers Overton Park’s record-review framework and what counts as an adequate record.

Section C.1–2: Separation of Functions and the Judicial/Bureaucratic Models (Withrow, Nash v. Bowen)
→ When the Agency Reviews Itself: How Internal Appeals Actually Work — covers separation of functions in practice.
→ Who Decides: ALJs vs. Non-ALJs — covers the institutional distinctions.
→ Why the Same Disability Claim Can Win or Lose Depending on Which Judge You Draw — directly addresses the “Ongoing Issues with ALJs in the Social Security Disability System” subsection.

Section D.1: Judicial Review of Agency Fact Finding (Universal Camera, Richardson v. Perales, Biestek, Data Processing)
→ Judicial Review of Agency Action — covers substantial evidence review and the standards for reviewing factual findings.
→ Why Two Identical Disability Cases Can Have Opposite Outcomes — directly covers the evidence and credibility determinations at stake in Richardson v. Perales and Biestek.
→ How Social Security Disability Hearings Work — provides the procedural context.

Section A.1: Agency Power to Issue Rules (National Petroleum Refiners)
→ Notice and Comment Rulemaking — covers the core rulemaking authority question.

Section A.2: Functional Relationship Between Rules and Adjudications (Heckler v. Campbell, Yetman)
→ Rulemaking vs. Adjudication — covers how rules and adjudications interact and the structural choice between them.

Section A.3: Making “Rules” Through Adjudication (Chenery II, Bowen v. Georgetown)
→ Agency Control of Adjudication — covers the Chenery doctrine and the choice between rulemaking and adjudication as policy instruments.

Section B.1: Decline of Formal Rulemaking (Florida East Coast)
→ Rulemaking vs. Adjudication — covers why formal rulemaking essentially died after Florida East Coast.

Section B.2: The Evolution of Informal Rulemaking (Vermont Yankee, Shell Oil, Portland Cement, ARRL, Nova Scotia, Sierra Club v. Costle, ANA v. FTC)
→ Notice and Comment Rulemaking — covers the full § 553 process, including notice, the “logical outgrowth” test, and the concise general statement requirement.
→ The Administrative Record Explained — covers the record-review framework that governs challenges to rules.

Section B.3: Exemptions (Mack Trucks, Little Sisters, Mendoza, American Mining Congress, Pacific Gas, Community Nutrition)
→ Notice and Comment Rulemaking — covers the good cause exception, interpretive rules, policy statements, and procedural rules exemptions.

Section C: Arbitrary and Capricious / Hard Look Review (NTDRA, State Farm, FCC v. Fox, Hard Look and Pretextual Reasoning)
→ Judicial Review of Agency Action — covers the State Farm test and arbitrary-and-capricious review.
→ The Administrative Record Explained — covers the Department of Commerce v. New York census case, which is the paradigmatic example for the “Hard Look Review and Pretextual Reasoning” subsection.

Section D: Ossification and Responses (Negotiated Rulemaking, Direct Final, Remand Without Vacatur)
→ Corner Post and Regulatory Finality — covers the downstream consequences of ossification for regulatory stability.
→ Two Executive Orders, Two Very Different Days in Court — covers negotiated rulemaking in context through the student loan plan’s required HEA restart.

Section A: The Pre-Chevron Approach (Hearst, Skidmore)
→ Chevron, Skidmore, and Loper Bright: How Courts Review Agency Decisions — the three-episode arc covers the pre-Chevron framework, including Skidmore deference.

Section B: The Chevron Revolution (Chevron, Scalia and Bressman excerpts, Walker’s Literature Review)
→ Chevron, Skidmore, and Loper Bright — core coverage of Chevron’s two-step framework, its theoretical basis, and the critique literature. Walker’s own scholarship is cited inside the deference debate; this three-episode treatment is the podcast’s parallel.

Section B.1–3: Step One Tools, Substantive Canons, and Step Two (Rucker, General Dynamics, SWANCC, Babbitt, Carter, AT&T v. Iowa Utilities, Rapanos, Encino Motorcars)
→ Chevron, Skidmore, and Loper Bright — covers the mechanics of Step One and Step Two analysis.

Section C: Chevron’s Scope and the Mead Counter-Revolution (Christensen, Mead, Barnhart)
→ Chevron, Skidmore, and Loper Bright — covers the Mead step-zero framework.

Section D: Chevron and Stare Decisis (Brand X, Home Concrete)
→ Chevron, Skidmore, and Loper Bright — covers the Brand X problem and its implications for Loper Bright.
→ Corner Post and Regulatory Finality — relevant to the broader stare decisis / regulatory stability question.

Section E: Chevron and Jurisdictional Questions (City of Arlington)
→ Chevron, Skidmore, and Loper Bright — covers the jurisdictional question debate.

Section F: Major Questions Doctrine (King v. Burwell, West Virginia v. EPA)
→ The Major Questions Doctrine Explained — covers King v. Burwell and West Virginia v. EPA and the doctrine’s current scope.
→ The Supreme Court’s Tariff Ruling Explained — current application of MQD reasoning to IEEPA tariffs in 2026.

Section G: Agency Interpretations of Agency Regulations (Auer, Talk America, Kisor)
→ Chevron, Skidmore, and Loper Bright — covers Auer/Kisor deference to agency interpretations of their own regulations.

Section A.1: Preclusion (Johnson v. Robison, Block v. Community Nutrition, Michigan Academy)
→ Scope Limits Explained: When Courts Won’t Review Agency Action at All — covers the presumption of reviewability and statutory preclusion.

Section A.2: Committed to Agency Discretion (Overton Park, Webster, Lincoln v. Vigil)
→ Scope Limits Explained — covers the “no law to apply” test and its modern application.

Section A.3: Agency Inaction (Dunlop v. Bachowski, Heckler v. Chaney, American Horse Protection v. Lyng)
→ Scope Limits Explained — covers Chaney’s presumption of unreviewability and the Adams v. Richardson abdication exception.

Section B.1: Final Agency Action (Franklin, Bennett v. Spear, Hawkes)
→ Finality Explained: When Has the Agency Actually Done Something You Can Sue About? — covers Bennett v. Spear’s two-part test, Sackett, and the current finality framework.

Section B.2: Ripeness (Abbott Labs, NOVA, Reno v. Catholic Social Services)
→ Ripeness, Exhaustion, and Mootness Explained — covers all three timing doctrines together.

Section B.3: Duty to Exhaust (McKart, McCarthy v. Madigan, Carr v. Saul)
→ Ripeness, Exhaustion, and Mootness Explained — covers exhaustion as one of the three timing doctrines, including issue exhaustion.

Section C.1: Constitutional Standing (Allen v. Wright, Akins, TransUnion, Lujan, Steel Co., Friends of the Earth, Massachusetts v. EPA)
→ Standing Explained: Why the Crocodile Case Decides Who Can Sue a Federal Agency — covers Lujan and the modern three-part framework.
→ When “I Want to Look at the White House” Isn’t Enough: The Ballroom Standing Ruling — current 2025 application of the particularized injury requirement.

Section C.2: Statutory Standing / Zone of Interests (NCUA, Patchak)
→ Standing Explained — covers the zone-of-interests test under the APA.