Matter of Attorneys In Violation of Judiciary Law § 468-a. (Kabasinga)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that a delegation of authority to an agency is constitutional so long as “Congress ‘lay[s] down by legislative act an intelligible principle to which the person or body authorized to [exercise the delegated authority] is directed to conform’”
• holding that a delegation of authority to an agency is constitutional so long as “Congress ‘lay[s] down by legislative act an intelligible principle to which the person or body authorized to [exercise the delegated authority] is directed to conform’”
• explaining that the Court interprets statutory provisions—including delegations—by reading the text “in ‘context’ and in light of the statutory ‘purpose’”
• noting that “a nondelegation inquiry always begins (and often almost ends) with statutory interpretation” and that “[t]he constitutional question is whether Congress has supplied an intelligible principle to guide the delegee’s use of discretion
• rejecting the petitioner’s preferred reading of the statute, under which the Court “would face a nondelegation question”
• explaining that the delegation was narrow because it (1

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).