CategoryFederal

Federal Register weekly update; highest weekly final rule total of 2019

The Federal Register is a daily journal of federal government activity that includes presidential documents, proposed and final rules, and public notices. It is a common measure of an administration’s regulatory activity.
 
During the week of June 17 to June 21, the number of pages in the Federal Register increased by 1,464 pages, bringing the year-to-date total to 29,370 pages. This week’s Federal Register featured a total of 616 documents, including 487 notices, three presidential documents, 36 proposed rules, and 90 final rules.
 
One proposed rule and two final rules were deemed significant under E.O. 12866—meaning that they may have large impacts on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. Significant actions may also conflict with presidential priorities or other agency rules.
 
During the same week in 2018, the number of pages in the Federal Register increased by 1,284 pages for a year-to-date total of 29,434 pages. As of June 21, the 2019 total trailed the 2018 total by 64 pages.
 
The Trump administration has added an average of 1,175 pages to the Federal Register each week in 2019 as of June 21. Over the course of 2018, the Trump administration added an average of 1,301 pages to the Federal Register each week. During the Obama administration, the Federal Register increased by an average of 1,658 pages per week.
 
According to government data, the Federal Register hit an all-time high of 95,894 pages in 2016.
 
Ballotpedia maintains page counts and other information about the Federal Register as part of its Administrative State Project. The project is a neutral, nonpartisan encyclopedic resource that defines and analyzes the administrative state, including its philosophical origins, legal and judicial precedents, and scholarly examinations of its consequences. The project also monitors and reports on measures of federal government activity.
 
Click here to find yearly information about additions to the Federal Register from 1936 to 2016: https://ballotpedia.org/Historical_additions_to_the_Federal_Register,_1936-2016


District judge signals willingness to reconsider citizenship question challenge

Judge George Jarrod Hazel of the United States District Court for the District of Maryland issued an order on June 19, 2019, stating that new evidence from a deceased Republican consultant’s hard drive “raises a substantial issue” that could warrant reconsideration of a case challenging the addition of a citizenship question on the 2020 U.S. Census.
 
Plaintiffs claim that the evidence demonstrates the Trump administration’s intent to add the citizenship question to the census in order to gain a Republican electoral advantage.
 
Hazel previously ruled against the citizenship question on procedural grounds in a consolidated case on April 5, 2019. The case is currently pending on appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. In order for Hazel to reconsider the case, the appellate court would need to return the case to the district court.
 
The United States Supreme Court is currently weighing a challenge to the citizenship question on procedural and constitutional grounds, _Department of Commerce v. New York_. A ruling is expected by the end of June.
 
If the new evidence motivates the district or appellate court to issue an injunction against the citizenship question on discrimination grounds, challengers could potentially return the case before the United States Supreme Court.
 


U.S. Supreme Court declines 5-3 to resuscitate nondelegation doctrine; Justice Gorsuch strongly dissents

In Gundy v. United States, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-3 that the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) did not violate the nondelegation doctrine, the constitutional principle forbidding Congress from delegating its legislative powers to the executive.
 
Justice Elena Kagan’s majority opinion noted that the court has only declared delegations of authority unconstitutional twice in its entire history and that past courts have upheld even broader delegations with less guidance from Congress. Justice Samuel Alito, who voted to uphold SORNA, wrote a separate opinion stating his willingness to reconsider how the court approaches future nondelegation doctrine challenges.
 
Justice Gorsuch filed a dissenting opinion arguing that SORNA is unconstitutional because it gives the U.S. attorney general the power to write and enforce his own criminal code. He argued, “The Constitution promises that only the people’s elected representatives may adopt new federal laws restricting liberty. Yet the statute before us scrambles that design. It purports to endow the nation’s chief prosecutor with the power to write his own criminal code governing the lives of a half-million citizens. Yes, those affected are some of the least popular among us. But if a single executive branch official can write laws restricting the liberty of this group of persons, what does that mean for the next?”
 
Herman Gundy was convicted for failing to register as a sex offender under SORNA even though his offense occurred before SORNA passed. He argued that Congress improperly gave away legislative power to the attorney general when it allowed him to decide whether and how to apply SORNA to sex offenders who were convicted earlier.
 
The last time the U.S. Supreme Court found that Congress violated the nondelegation doctrine was in two 1935 cases involving the National Industrial Recovery Act passed during the New Deal.
 


Bullock is 21st Democrat to qualify for second 20-person set of debates

Montana Governor Steve Bullock’s campaign announced on June 18 that he had met the polling threshold to participate in the second set of Democratic presidential primary debates. The two CNN-hosted debates will take place July 30 and 31 in Detroit, Michigan.
 
Bullock is the 21st candidate to meet at least one of the two criteria to qualify, but no more than 20 candidates—10 per night—can participate. His qualification will trigger tie-breakers to the final candidate list.
 
The first set of rules to qualify are:
 
  • Receive 1% support or more in three national or early state polls—Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and/or Nevada—publicly released between January 1, 2019, and 14 days prior to the date of the debate.
  • Receive donations from at least 65,000 unique donors and a minimum of 200 unique donors per state in at least 20 states.
 
The tiebreaker will be decided according to the rules below, in order of preference:
 
  • Candidates who have reached both the polling and grassroots thresholds;
  • Candidates with the highest polling averages; and
  • Candidates with the highest number of contributions.
 
Four noteworthy Democratic candidates have met neither the polling nor fundraising criteria for the July 30 and 31 debates: Michael Bennet, Mike Gravel, Seth Moulton, and Wayne Messam.
 
Bullock is one of four noteworthy Democratic primary candidates who did not qualify for the first set of debates taking place June 26 and 27 in Miami, Florida. The others are Gravel, Moulton, and Messam.


U.S. Senators Lee and Hawley propose increasing presidential control of agency officials

U.S. Senators Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) introduced a bill that would give presidents more control over the administrative state. The Take Care Act, introduced on June 5, 2019, would repeal limitations on the president’s authority to remove Senate-confirmed officials in the executive branch and at independent agencies. The bill aims to make agencies more accountable by allowing new presidents to control agency leadership.
 
After the U.S. Supreme Court decided Humphrey’s Executor in 1935, several laws kept the president from being able to remove agency officials at-will. Under the Take Care Act, Congress would have to pass new laws to restrict presidential removal power in the future. If passed, the Take Care Act would go into effect on January 20, 2021, after the next presidential election.
 


Federal Register weekly update; lowest weekly proposed rule total since April

The Federal Register is a daily journal of federal government activity that includes presidential documents, proposed and final rules, and public notices. It is a common measure of an administration’s regulatory activity.
 
During the week of June 10 to June 14, the number of pages in the Federal Register increased by 1,168 pages, bringing the year-to-date total to 27,906 pages. This week’s Federal Register featured a total of 533 documents, including 447 notices, seven presidential documents, 36 proposed rules, and 43 final rules.
 
One proposed rule was deemed significant under E.O. 12866—meaning that it may have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. Significant actions may also conflict with presidential priorities or other agency rules.
 
During the same week in 2018, the number of pages in the Federal Register increased by 1,318 pages for a year-to-date total of 28,150 pages. As of June 14, the 2019 total trailed the 2018 total by 244 pages.
 
The Trump administration has added an average of 1,163 pages to the Federal Register each week in 2019 as of June 14. Over the course of 2018, the Trump administration added an average of 1,301 pages to the Federal Register each week. During the Obama administration, the Federal Register increased by an average of 1,658 pages per week.
 
According to government data, the Federal Register hit an all-time high of 95,894 pages in 2016.
 
Ballotpedia maintains page counts and other information about the Federal Register as part of its Administrative State Project. The project is a neutral, nonpartisan encyclopedic resource that defines and analyzes the administrative state, including its philosophical origins, legal and judicial precedents, and scholarly examinations of its consequences. The project also monitors and reports on measures of federal government activity.
 
Additional reading:
Click here to find yearly information about additions to the Federal Register from 1936 to 2016: https://ballotpedia.org/Historical_additions_to_the_Federal_Register,_1936-2016


A closer look at Trump’s twice-nominated judge: Peter Phipps

President Donald Trump (R) has announced 190 Article III judicial nominations since taking office on January 20, 2017. Two of those individuals, Peter Phipps and A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr., were nominated twice to different courts.
 
On February 15, 2018, Trump first nominated Phipps to serve on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. The U.S. Senate confirmed Phipps to the District Court on October 11, 2018, by voice vote. On May 13, 2019, the president then nominated Phipps to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.
 
Phipps was nominated to the Western District of Pennsylvania on recommendation from Pennsylvania Senators Pat Toomey (R) and Bob Casey Jr. (D). Toomey also supported Phipps’ 3rd Circuit nomination, saying, “Judge Phipps will make an outstanding addition to the Third Circuit. He has the experience, intellect and integrity to be a superb circuit court judge.” Casey, however, expressed opposition to the second nomination and questioned whether “six months on that bench is sufficient experience or preparation” for a Circuit Court elevation. Casey also said, “Circuit court judges are often asked to decide questions of law that can have an enormous impact on Americans’ lives, and I have significant concerns about Judge Phipps’ judicial and constitutional philosophy.”
 
The United States Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit is one of 13 U.S. courts of appeal. They are the intermediate appellate courts of the United States federal court system. The court has 14 authorized judgeships and one current vacancy. Republican presidents appointed seven of the current judges. Democratic presidents appointed the remaining six judges. The 3rd Circuit has appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania.
 
Phipps was born in Abilene, Texas, in 1973. He received a B.S. in physics and a B.A. in history from the University of Dayton in 1995. He obtained a J.D. from Stanford Law School in 1998. During his legal studies, Phipps served as a managing editor of the Stanford Law Review from 1997 to 1998. He worked in private practice from 1998 to 2001 and then became a law clerk to Judge Guy Cole of the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals from 2001 to 2002. From 2003 to 2018, Phipps was an attorney with the Federal Programs Branch of the U.S. Department of Justice’s Civil Division.
 
The president has also nominated A. Marvin Quattlebaum Jr. twice. Quattlebaum Jr. was nominated to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina in 2017 and confirmed in March 2018. In May 2018, the president nominated Quattlebaum to a seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. The U.S. Senate confirmed the nomination on August 16, 2018.
 


Sixteen Democratic presidential candidates have called for Donald Trump impeachment proceedings

Sixteen of the 24 noteworthy Democratic candidates for president have called for President Donald Trump’s (R) impeachment.
 
The most recent candidates to join in impeachment calls did so last Friday. Both Bill de Blasio and Amy Klobuchar called for impeachment following statements made by Trump last week on ABC News. In an interview, Trump said he would consider accepting information on 2020 rivals from foreign nations.
 
As a member of the U.S. Senate, Klobuchar would be responsible for voting on whether to convict and remove the president during impeachment proceedings. She is the sixth member of the U.S. Senate running for president to call for Trump’s impeachment. Only one—Michael Bennet—has not.
 
Four candidates are members of the U.S. House, which would be responsible for voting on articles of impeachment. Three of those candidates—Seth Moulton, Tim Ryan, and Eric Swalwell—have called for Trump’s impeachment.
 
The full list of presidential candidates to call for impeachment proceedings against Trump is: Cory Booker, Pet Buttigieg, Julian Castro, Blasio, Kirsten Gillibrand, Mike Gravel, Kamala Harris, John Hickenlooper, Klobuchar, Wayne Messam, Moulton, Beto O’Rourke, Ryan, Bernie Sanders, Swalwell, and Elizabeth Warren.


Presidential pageviews update: Buttigieg receives most Ballotpedia pageviews, followed by Biden and Yang

Each week, we report the number of pageviews received by 2020 presidential candidates on Ballotpedia. These numbers show which candidates are getting our readers’ attention.
 
South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg racked up 3,771 pageviews for the week of June 9-15. That represents 8.1 percent of the pageviews for all Democratic campaigns during the week. Former Vice President Joe Biden had 7.2 percent of the campaign pageviews for the week, while entrepreneur Andrew Yang had 7.1 percent.
 
Former Sen. Mike Gravel (Alaska) had the largest increase of all the campaigns last week, increasing 3.8% over his previous total.
 
The top three campaigns in lifetime pageviews are Buttigieg with 68,395, Yang with 55,707, and Sen. Kamala Harris (Calif.) with 49,969.
 
On the GOP side, former Massachusetts Gov. Bill Weld had 8,102 pageviews to President Trump’s 1,393.


2020 Democratic presidential field split on impeachment

Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) became the fourteenth Democratic presidential candidate to support initiating impeachment proceedings against President Donald Trump (R) Thursday.
 
The first calls for impeachment proceedings came in April after the U.S. Department of Justice released special counsel Robert Mueller’s report investigating allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, coordination between Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia, and obstruction of justice.
 
Mueller stated in the report that “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.” He also wrote that the report neither concluded Trump had committed a crime nor exonerated him.
 
As a member of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee, Swalwell would be the only presidential candidate involved in the committee investigation of Trump if impeachment proceedings were initiated.
 
Some candidates, like Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) and Gov. Steve Bullock (D-Mont.), have said Congress should use its oversight power and continue current investigations before launching any impeachment process.
 
Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) and entrepreneur Andrew Yang (D) have said Trump should be defeated at the ballot box.
 
Altogether, 10 candidates have not called for impeachment proceedings to begin.