•  
  •  
 

Authors

Paul Chuey

Abstract

By deferring to the discretion of another branch of the federal government on a question of constitutional interpretation, the Rust Court implicitly resurrects and reshapes the long ignored doctrine of Katzenbach v. Morgan. Despite their different substantive issues, these two cases have a similar effect on the federal judiciary's role in constitutional interpretation. Section I of this Note describes the facts and history surrounding Rust and Morgan. Section II examines the Rust doctrine of judicial deference in the context of Morgan. Section III examines the Rust Court's approach to the First Amendment issues raised by the regulation in question. Finally, Section IV explores Rust's possible implications.