The Insidious Power of Anti-administrative Rhetoric
American administration is at a crossroads. In a series of consequential opinions, the U.S. Supreme Court has made clear its skepticism of administration in its current form. Decades-old precedent has been expressly discarded or studiously ignored.
- In Loper Bright v. Raimondo, the Court spurned deference to administrative experts in favor of de novo judicial interpretation of statutes.
- In Jarkesy v. SEC, it limited agencies’ ability to adjudicate statutory violations internally.
- In West Virginia v. EPA, it sharply constrained agencies’ authority to tackle new problems under existing statutes.
These doctrinal developments are deservedly receiving significant public attention. But the current anti-administrative turn has a rhetorical as well as a substantive dimension. This essay takes as its focus the public rhetoric of anti-administrativism.
The rhetoric of anti-administrativism invokes powerful tropes. Rhetoric aimed at diminishing people or groups sometimes dehumanizes in order to normalize repression and even violence. Anti-administrative rhetoric does the exact opposite: it animates, creating out of a set of organizations and procedures a living, breathing monster that can become the object of both fear and resentment. Anti-administrative rhetoric is not new. But it has taken on increased salience as debates about the place of agencies in American government become increasingly polarized and intense.
This essay documents and typologizes anti-administrative rhetoric. It also explains why and how that rhetoric can be misleading. Ultimately, it concludes that anti-administrative rhetoric is an especially powerful tool because of the deafening silence with which it has been met. Rather than recommend constraints on anti-administrative speech, the Essay proposes the development of a more thoughtful counter-rhetoric that more accurately represents the agencies that implement our laws and the civil servants who staff them.
About the Public Law Workshop
Michigan’s Public Law Workshop provides an opportunity for faculty and students from across the University to enjoy weekly presentations by leading scholars producing current work on topics ranging from constitutional law and administrative law to international law, statutory interpretation and beyond. Professors Julian Mortenson and Daniel Deacon organize the workshop. If you would like to receive workshop announcements, please contact Alex Wroble ([email protected]) and ask to have your name added to the workshop’s email list.
