Bridget offers a useful corrective to the buzzwordification of how we talk about government—and, if we're not careful, how we actually govern. "We can likely make great progress in regulatory policy by letting algorithms into our loop, not the other way around."
Joe Tomlinson & @brendanmcgurk.bsky.social give an overview of how the UK is handling the intersection of AI and administrative law.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/artificia...
Tara Aida notes that APA § 553 has a background assumption that human intelligence runs administrative processes. "If agencies over-rely on AI to carry out these procedural tasks, they threaten to undermine § 553’s goal of improving the quality of final rules."
www.yalejreg.com/nc/ticking-t...
@jtillipman.bsky.social: "complex challenges arise when [AI tools] extend into discretionary functions, including core evaluative tasks, that federal procurement doctrine presumes a human decision-maker will perform."
www.yalejreg.com/nc/abdicated...
Reeve Bull gets us up to speed on how Virginia has been using AI tools to engage in regulatory reform. Click here for an insider's view.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/ai-empowe...
Elliot E.C. Ping works through whether chain-of-thought prompt engineering can solve the black box problem.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/iterative...
@adamgcrews.bsky.social argues that courts can adapt to agency use of AI by looking to agency practice, rather than through judicial creativity and policy balancing.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/agencies-...
Gilbert Orbea and Emily Froude of @democracyforward.org lay out three preliminary factors to guide courts when reviewing the use of AI in the regulatory process.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/determini...
Jack Jones and Burçin Ünel of @policyintegrity.bsky.social offer that, whether an agency uses AI or not, if a "rule ignores key evidence, fails to address major concerns or alternatives, or offers inconsistent reasoning, it will be struck down as arbitrary."
www.yalejreg.com/nc/do-large-...
Next, @j-p-a.bsky.social and John Lewis draw on recent reporting to argue that if "agencies setting machines loose to generate and justify regulatory proposals once seemed far-fetched, it no longer does" & that admin law standards can keep agencies accountable.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/toward-mi...
And next up: me and @jtlew3.bsky.social on what minimum legal standards might accompany agency use of AI in policymaking. www.yalejreg.com/nc/toward-mi...
Today in our AI & the APA symposium: @cary-coglianese.bsky.social discusses the place of those very confident-sounding chatbots in administrative decisionmaking. www.yalejreg.com/nc/ai-taxi-d...
Over at the Yale Journal on Regulation's blog, @j-p-a.bsky.social and I have put together a 🔥 symposium for you on the intersection of AI and administrative law.
This symposium is for AI skeptics, AI believers, and everyone in between. Come join us!
www.yalejreg.com/topic/sympos...
This is my favorite part of the OPM guidance. "...Agencies are instructed to circumvent OPM's RIF regulations using other means."
🚨 ATTN: Tech and admin law heads. @bridgetdooling.bsky.social and I have convened a fantastic blog symposium on AI and the APA! Follow along at Notice & Comment over the next ~week for sharp insights from a very thoughtful panel of academics and practitioners. www.yalejreg.com/topic/sympos...
A ProPublica report on plans to use AI to write regulations at the US Department of Transportation should be a warning signal for public interest advocates and litigators, writes Jordan Ascher, policy counsel at Governing for Impact. It’s time to prepare for a flood of machine-generated rules.
Last week, ProPublica reported that the DOT was set to use Gemini to write rules (or, in their words, generate "word salad"). Today, in @techpolicypress.bsky.social, I try to situate that reporting in context and dig into why it is disturbing. www.techpolicy.press/trump-admini...
NEW: The Trump administration is planning to use AI to write federal regulations despite the risk of hallucinations.
“We don't even need a very good rule,” the Transportation Department’s top lawyer said of the plan, per meeting notes reviewed by ProPublica. “We want good enough.”🧵
Very glad to speak with @jessecoburn.bsky.social for this 🔥 story.
Walt Whitman:
Section 1 of the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871—codified at 42 U.S.C. § 1983—is a cornerstone civil rights law that is more vital than ever today. Boldness like this can matter down the centuries.
It boggles the mind how much could be done for society—and how much inane case law could be abrogated—with just a few modest amendments to Section 1983.
This kind of sophistry is frequently encouraged in the legal profession. And it’s been on a roll recently!
:)
To emphasize Steve's point: Fourth Circuit suggested that employees may be able to file in district court because the MSPB no longer functions as Congress intended due to (1) a lack of quorum (fixed as of October) and (2) the likelihood that removal protections would be found unconstitutional.
Saving the easy stuff for the end, I see.
Today in Lawfare: Trump's plan to screen federal job applicants for political allegiance is flagrantly unlawful. We explain why and what litigants might think about.
Reports of the death of universal preliminary relief are greatly exaggerated—at least as to final agency action. From me, today, in @justsecurity.org:
