Unwritten Law

Chevron deference may be gone—but is the Supreme Court quietly laying the groundwork for something even worse?In this episode of Unwritten Law, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione examine a recent Supreme Court decision that could dramatically reshape administrative law. Drawing on analysis by Will Yeatman, they discuss how the Court’s handling of VanDerStok risks giving agencies a powerful new shield by treating challenges to regulations as “facial” attacks—making them nearly impossible to win.The conversation dives into why this approach departs from traditional administrative-law principles, how lower courts may use it to avoid meaningful judicial review, and why this decision could become a dangerous tool for future administrations—regardless of political party.If you care about limits on bureaucratic power, the future of post-Chevron litigation, or the proper role of courts in reviewing agency action, this episode explains why VanDerStok is an issue worth watching closely.

As the nation approaches the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the Chief Justice of the United States reflects on America’s founding principles in his annual Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary. But what does that report really say about the state of the Supreme Court today?In this episode of Unwritten Law, NCLA President Mark Chenoweth and Senior Litigation Counsel John Vecchione unpack Chief Justice Roberts’s historical reflections, his views on the Declaration of Independence, and what judicial independence truly means in modern constitutional law. They explore whether the Declaration is merely “ancillary” or something closer to law itself—and why that debate matters.The discussion also turns to a persistent frustration: the Supreme Court’s shrinking docket. With filings down and opinions limited, Mark and John ask whether the Court is failing to address critical legal questions that affect Americans’ daily lives—and what consequences follow when major precedents are left to “fester” in the lower courts.

In this episode of Unwritten Law, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione dig into a major new essay by R.J. Pestritto, Senior Fellow at the Claremont Institute, titled “Government by the Unelected: How It Happened and How It Might Be Tamed.”https://dc.claremont.org/government-by-the-unelected-how-it-happened-and-how-it-might-be-tamed/The discussion traces the intellectual and legal origins of the modern administrative state — from Progressive-era theory and Woodrow Wilson, through the New Deal, the rise of Chevron deference, and decades of judicial decisions that insulated federal agencies from democratic control. Mark and John explain how ideas developed in academia slowly reshaped constitutional doctrine, allowing unelected bureaucrats to accumulate legislative, executive, and judicial power.The episode also examines how recent Supreme Court decisions — including Loper Bright, Corner Post, Jarkesy, and ongoing removal-power cases — may signal a turning point. Together, these cases suggest a rebalancing of constitutional authority: less deference to agencies, greater accountability to the President, and renewed pressure on Congress to legislate rather than delegate.This conversation offers a clear, accessible explanation of how we got here, why the administrative state became untethered from the Constitution, and what it will take to restore democratic accountability.

Why are the Little Sisters of the Poor still being dragged into court over the Affordable Care Act’s contraception mandate—years after the Supreme Court ruled in their favor?On this episode of Unwritten Law, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione are joined by NCLA Senior Litigation Counsel Andy Morris to discuss a newly filed amicus brief at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Pennsylvania & New Jersey v. Trump. The case challenges religious exemptions that protect the Little Sisters, Catholic nuns who object to being forced to provide contraception coverage.The conversation explores how federal agencies imposed the mandate without clear congressional authorization, why Pennsylvania and New Jersey are suing to eliminate long-standing religious exemptions, and how the case exposes serious constitutional problems—including lack of standing, agency overreach, and violations of the nondelegation doctrine.At its core, this episode explains why vague laws and unchecked bureaucratic power threaten religious liberty and the separation of powers—and why courts should put an end to litigation that never should have continued.Unwritten Law examines how unwritten rules, agency actions, and judicial shortcuts quietly reshape the law—often without the consent of the governed.

In this episode of Unwritten Law, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione are joined by Andreia Trifoi to discuss NCLA’s constitutional challenge to the City of Marco Island’s use of automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) — a surveillance system that records and stores the movements of every driver entering or leaving the island.Because Marco Island has only three bridges, residents are photographed and tracked multiple times a day, with their location data retained for years and potentially shared with other agencies or private companies. The hosts explain why this dragnet surveillance goes far beyond ordinary police observation and raises serious Fourth Amendment concerns.This episode explores how emerging surveillance technology is testing the limits of constitutional privacy — and why courts must confront these questions before mass tracking becomes the norm.

In this follow-up episode of Unwritten Law, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione continue their deep dive into the Supreme Court’s oral argument in Trump v. Slaughter, focusing on key issues that received less attention in Part I — but may prove just as consequential.The conversation explores whether there is any meaningful constitutional distinction between criminal and civil enforcement, and why several justices appeared skeptical of claims that civil enforcement power is somehow “less executive.” The hosts explain why allowing independent agencies like the FTC and SEC to prosecute their own civil cases — outside the Department of Justice — raises serious accountability and separation-of-powers concerns.

Just days after oral argument, Unwritten Law hosts Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione break down one of the most consequential separation-of-powers cases in decades: Trump v. Slaughter.At stake is Humphrey’s Executor, the 1935 Supreme Court decision that allowed Congress to insulate powerful federal regulators from presidential control. If overturned, the ruling could fundamentally reshape the modern administrative state.Mark and John walk through the justices’ questions, the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments on both sides, and why several members of the Court appear ready to rethink nearly a century of doctrine.This episode offers a clear, candid look at how the Court may redraw the constitutional boundaries of executive power — and what that means for self-government in America.

In this episode, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione sit down with NCLA Litigation Counsel Casey Norman to break down a major regulatory win: stopping FERC’s sweeping “Duty of Candor” rule before it ever hit the books. The proposed rule would have allowed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to punish any speaker — from corporations to ordinary citizens — for any statement, email, or phone call the agency deemed “false,” “misleading,” or missing “material information,” with no mens rea requirement and no defined limits.Casey walks through why this vague, overbroad rule was a First Amendment disaster waiting to happen; how it risked chilling public debate on energy and environmental policy; and how NCLA’s detailed comments helped persuade FERC to scrap the rule entirely. The team also explores how the proposal fit into a broader pattern of government attempts to police “truth,” and why regulatory speech controls should worry everyone.It’s a rare victory in the world of administrative rulemaking — and a reminder that sometimes the best lawsuit is the one you never have to file.

In this episode, Casey Norman joins Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione to unpack BASE Access, et al. v. National Park Service, a remarkable case about whether a federal agency can criminalize BASE jumping in national parks without any clear authorization from Congress. For nearly 50 years, the National Park Service has treated BASE jumping as a crime—even though the regulation they rely on was written in the 1950s to prevent cargo drops, not recreational jumping.Casey explains the nondelegation challenge, the vagueness problem, the strange double standard with hang gliding, and why a federal judge in Houston is pressing the government to rethink its outdated criminal rules. If you care about the Constitution, criminal law, or just enjoy wild outdoor sports, this episode has something for you.

Senior Litigation Counsel Russ Ryan joins Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione to break down Barton v. SEC, a newly filed cert petition that challenges the SEC’s practice of using court-appointed receivers to seize assets, run companies, and even sue third parties—all without clear statutory authority. Russ explains how these ad-hoc receiverships raise serious Appointments Clause, separation-of-powers, bankruptcy-evasion, and Sixth Amendment concerns, and why the Supreme Court should put a stop to this shadow system. A deep dive into one of the most under-scrutinized abuses in federal enforcement.

In this episode of Unwritten Law, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione welcome Margot Cleveland to unpack the Supreme Court case Trump v. Slaughter, a historic challenge to whether the President can remove commissioners of the Federal Trade Commission at will.They walk through the key amicus briefs, Professor Caleb Nelson’s arguments, and Philip Hamburger’s response in the Yale Journal on Regulation emphasizing the Constitution’s unitary executive structure. The trio also discuss the foreign-policy powers exercised by modern independent agencies and why the Court may finally be ready to overturn Humphrey’s Executor. A deep dive into one of the most important separation-of-powers cases of the term.

Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione recap the 2025 Federalist Society National Lawyers Convention, offering candid insight into what made this year’s gathering different. From Judge Andy Oldham’s powerful Barbara Olson Lecture to unexpected debate pairings and shifts in programming philosophy, they break down where the convention excelled — and where it missed opportunities.They discuss the tension between staging debates for show versus digging into substantive legal questions, the increasing presence of younger speakers, the lack of deep dives on topics like tariffs and administrative overreach, and the overall feel of the event’s intellectual energy. Mark and John also highlight memorable moments, including the conversation with Justices Barrett and Kavanaugh, Steve Bradbury’s Department of Transportation panel, and a compelling discussion on free speech rights for non-citizens.A mix of recap, critique, and commentary, this episode gives listeners an insider’s view of how the conservative legal movement’s biggest annual gathering is evolving in 2025.

John Vecchione sits down with Kara Rollins to explore her recent piece in the Yale Journal on Regulation titled “Necessary” Discretion: A Primer for Non-Lawyers. They delve into what it really means when legislatures grant agencies the authority to act when something is “necessary,” how courts interpret these trigger‐words, and why this matters for administrative power. From the Spending Clause to rule‐making, this conversation breaks down complex doctrine in plain terms and shows how “necessary” might mean more than you think.

Senior Litigation Counsel Margaret Harker joins Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione to unpack the House Oversight Committee’s auto-pen investigation — a 100-page probe that raises serious questions about President Biden’s cognitive fitness, missing decision records, and last-minute pardons allegedly authorized via an auto-pen rather than by the President himself. They discuss the committee’s referral to the Department of Justice, the legal issues around voiding pardons, and why the report’s findings matter for presidential accountability and the rule of law.

Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione welcome NCLA Senior Litigation Counsel Russ Ryan for a jaw-dropping judicial-ethics cases.A Texas judge—currently presiding over a live case—has written three novels featuring characters bearing striking resemblance of herself and on one of the actual litigants before her. The fictional version of the real-life businessman is cast as a villain.The case is Dondero v. Jernigan, raising fundamental questions about impartiality.Russ walks through the surreal facts and NCLA’s concise but impactful amicus brief urging the Court to fix the problem.This is an episode you do not want to miss.

Fresh from the Supreme Court, Mark Chenoweth, John Vecchione, and Andy Morris break down oral arguments in the Trump tariffs case — a landmark challenge over whether the president can impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA).John and Andy share what they saw in the courtroom, how the justices responded, and why this case could redefine the limits of executive authority. From Justice Kagan’s sharp textual questions to Justice Kavanaugh’s deference to presidential power, the episode captures the day’s biggest moments — and what they reveal about the future of constitutional checks and balances.

In this episode of Unwritten Law, Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione welcome NCLA’s new Senior Litigation Counsel, Jacob Huebert, to unpack Trump v. Cook — a landmark Supreme Court case testing whether the president can fire a Federal Reserve governor at will. They dive into the constitutional roots of Article II, what it means for presidential authority, and why the Fed’s independence might not be as untouchable as some believe.

The Supreme Court is set to hear Trump v. Slaughter, a landmark case that could finally overturn Humphrey’s Executor—the 1935 decision that created “independent” federal agencies beyond presidential control. Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione are joined by NCLA’s Margot Cleveland, principal author of NCLA's amicus brief, to explain why this case could restore accountability to the executive branch and rein in the modern administrative state. From the origins of the FTC to the constitutional power of removal under Article II, this episode unpacks how the Court’s decision could reshape the balance of power in Washington.

Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione are joined by NCLA’s Andy Morris to discuss one of the most consequential Supreme Court cases of the term — whether the president can impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). They unpack the history of emergency powers, Congress’s exclusive authority to levy taxes, and how past presidents have tested these limits.From Roosevelt’s bank closures to Trump’s trade wars, this episode explores why the Constitution clearly puts tariff authority in Congress’s hands — not the Oval Office.

In part two of Unwritten Law’s conversation with John Malcolm and Professor Josh Blackman, hosts Mark Chenoweth and John Vecchione explore the deeper substance of The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, Third Edition. The group discusses Justice Samuel Alito’s foreword, the “Mount Rushmore of Originalism,” and the evolution of constitutional thought from the Founding era to today. From the confrontation clause to the 27th Amendment, the conversation highlights surprising insights and little-known historical details that shaped our understanding of America’s founding document.A must-listen for anyone passionate about originalism, constitutional history, and the ongoing effort to keep the meaning of the Constitution alive and clear.