Vindicating Public Rights
Blake Emerson* | 26.6 | Citation: Blake Emerson, Vindicating Public Rights, 26 U. Pa. J. Const. L. 1424 (2024).
Formalist jurists are constructing a new kind of administrative law. In this emerging regime of private prerogative, “private rights” of property and contract receive heightened protection against administrative interference. These rights get special treatment in the form of novel constitutional rules against the delegation of policymaking and adjudicatory authority to agencies, as well as restrictive principles of statutory interpretation. Private prerogative treats economic entitlements as sacrosanct, and therefore grants their holders discretionary control over other people. Administrative power is treated as a generally threatening and often arbitrary imposition that often risks and never protects constitutional rights.
This Article offers a better alternative. It argues for an administrative law of public liberty that is more firmly grounded in the legal materials and more responsive to the requirements of popular sovereignty. Understood as the law of public liberty, administrative law is not primarily about the restraint of governmental power to protect vested economic interests. Rather, administrative law affirmatively protects “public rights”—entitlements held by the body politic that are requisite to republican self-government. These include the people’s rights to health, safety, and equality. Such rights routinely and pervasively impinge upon property and contract. While historically anchored in monarchical sovereignty and made actionable in the common law of nuisance, public rights today are anchored in popular sovereignty, recognized by federal statutory law, and implemented by federal regulatory agencies. Agencies are competent to protect these shared political interests where private initiative and ordinary litigation cannot.
***
*Blake Emerson, Professor of Law and Political Science (by courtesy), UCLA.