A Hard Look – Details, episodes & analysis

Welcome back to A Hard Look! This offers a deeper dive into The Mandate for Leadership, also known as Project 2025. In Part Two, we analyze the document alongside experts Dr. Don Kettl and Dr. Jennifer Selin.

Visit our website:  https://administrativelawreview.org/podcast-a-hard-look/

Learn more about our guests

Jennifer Selin: Google Scholar Profile

Don Kettl: LinkedIn

Recommended Readings

Heritage Foundation

"Mandate for Leadership: The Conservative Promise” by The Heritage Foundation (also known as Project 2025)

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)

“Constraining the Executive Branch: Congressional Use of the Courts in the Administrative State” by Jennifer Selin and Pamela Clouser McCann 

“The Importance of Removal Restrictions in a Schedule F World” by Jennifer Selin and Paul Verkuil 

“The Transformation of Governance: Public Administration for the Twenty-First Century” by Donald Kettl

“The Divided States of America” by Donald Kettl

This episode was produced by the Administrative Law Review Senior Technology Editor, Sophia Navedo-Quinones, and Technology Editor, Victoria Paul. Thank you to American University Washington College of Law’s Professor Lubbers and Professor Popper for their guidance on this episode.

If you have any questions about this episode or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

The transcript for this episode can be found here.

Welcome back to A Hard Look! This episode provides an objective overview of The Mandate for Leadership, also known as Project 2025. This is Part One, of our two-part series on Project 2025. Stay tuned for Part Two, which is a Q&A with legal and policy experts. ,

Visit our website:  https://administrativelawreview.org/podcast-a-hard-look/

Recommended Readings

Heritage Foundation

Project 2025 by the Heritage Foundation

Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)

This episode was produced by the Administrative Law Review Senior Technology Editor, Sophia Navedo-Quinones, and Technology Editor, Victoria Paul.

If you have any questions about this episode or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail us at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

The transcript for this episode can be found here.

In this episode of A Hard Look, Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews current Washington College of Law 3L and Senior Articles Editor Mehraz Rahman regarding her comment published in ALR Volume 75.3. In this episode, we review the ongoing controversies surrounding Title IX sexual misconduct adjudication on college campuses, and how standards for holding these adjudications have changed from administration to administration over the course of the past decade. Then we turn our attention to how this process can be formalized and reformed to better serve the interests of victims, accused, and the substantial interests of justice and due process implicated in these hearings.

---

This Episode was produced by Administrative Law Review Technology Editor Anthony Aviza.

If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu

---

If you believe you have been a victim of sexual violence, you can use the recourses below to find help:

For AU Students, please contact the Office of Equity and Title IX.

For Non-Students: National Sexual Assault Hotline with Confidential 24/7 Support: 1-800-656-4673 Campus Sexual Violence Recourse List

---

Recommended Reading

Mehraz’s Comment (TBP) This Episode's Transcript

2011 Dear Colleague Letter

2014 Q&A

Withdrawal of the 2011 DCL & 2014 Q&A

Summary of Major Provisions of the Department of Education’s Title IX Final Rule under the Trump Administration

U.S. Department of Education’s 2022 Proposed Amendments to Title IX Regulations

On this episode of A Hard Look, Senior Technology Editor Bennett J. Nuss interviews Adam Pollock, a 3L at American University Washington College of Law and current Editor for Online Publications. In this episode, we review the systemic structure of the Bureau of Immigration Appeals, and how this system is operating considering the ever-growing strain of immigration on U.S. Courts. We also interrogate the propriety and effects of Patel v. Garland, a Supreme Court case that limits the degree of review afforded to those that appeal rulings by the BIA. Finally, we look at how the BIA can be potentially reformed to better serve the interests of fairness and substantial justice.
---

This Episode was produced by Administrative Law Review Technology Editor, Anthony Aviza.

Many thanks as well to Administrative Law Review Editor-in-Chief Madison Gestiehr for her assistance in transcribing this episode.

If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or guest, please e-mail Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu

---

Recommended Reading:

This Episode’s TranscriptDeported Over a Typo: Making Sense of the Board of Appeals’Newfound Administrative Power in the Wake of Patel v. Garland
Patel v.Garland
Congressional Research Service: U.S. Immigration Courts and the Pending Cases Backlog
Innovation Law Lab: The Attorney General’s Judges

On this episode of the ⁠Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look⁠, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, ⁠Alexander Naum⁠ speak with Lauren Saxe, a rising 2L at American University Washington College of Law and ALR's incoming Senior Symposia & Communications Editor. In this episode, we review the regulatory framework surrounding FDA’s approval of Mifepristone in 2000. Including reviewing and questioning its REMS status by the Agency. As well as analyzing how the Supreme Court’s ruling in Dobbs has limited access to this medication. And how recent and pending federal jurisprudence can potentially jeopardize nationwide access to this medication for patients seeking access to abortion and miscarriage treatment. If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Bennett Nuss at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu

On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, Alexander Naum, and our Technology Editor, Eva Pedersen speak with information justice and intellectual property expert, Michael W. Carroll. In this episode, we review the emergence of generative artificial intelligence (AI), including the popular program "ChatGPT." We analyze the potential fair use implications of these programs, as well as the broader ethical and legal challenges in regulating these programs.

If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, Alexander Naum speak with Linda Reinstein (President and Co-founder of the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization). In this episode, we explore the history of asbestos’s commercial use in the United States and the health threats associated with asbestos exposure. The episode dives into the EPA’s failed attempt to ban asbestos and the gaps found within current asbestos regulation. As well as the continued progress made by the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization in urging Federal Agencies and Congress to protect workers and communities from asbestos exposure.  

If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu

On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Technology Editor, Eva Pederson speak with Martin Mitchell, former Presidential Appointee serving as an Appellate Military Judge on the U.S. Court of Military Commissions Review, former USAF JAG Officer, and current Veterans Law Judge, about the evolution of military justice; Ortiz v. United States; and the constitutional issues that remain as the DoD aims to balance the objectives of protecting individual liberties, promoting military discipline, and ensuring that justice is served.

If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, Alexander Naum speak with Aliza Shatzman (President and Co-founder of the Legal Accountability Project). In this episode, we review the gaps found in the current state of Judicial Accountability framed by our guest’s experience of mistreatment in her former clerkship; including her struggle to obtain retribution using the administrative procedures currently available and her continuing fight to protect judicial clerks and hold judges accountable for their actions.  

If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.

On this episode of the Administrative Law Review’s A Hard Look, tune in to listen to our Senior Technology Editor, Alexander Naum, and our Technology Editor, Eva Bogdewic speak with Environmental Law expert, William Snape, III. In this episode, we review the Supreme Court’s ruling in WV v. EPA and its implications on climate policy, and the broader implications to Administrative Law as it relates to Chevron Deference and the Major Questions Doctrine. If you have any questions about this episode, the guest, or the podcast, or if you would like to propose a topic or a guest, please email Alexander Naum at ALR-Sr-Tech-Editor@wcl.american.edu.