Adam Crews
@adamgcrews.bsky.social
Rutgers Law Prof | Admin • Civ Pro • Fed Courts | 🏳️🌈
Having way too much fun writing my Admin supplement for next semester.
November 18, 2025 at 1:58 AM
Having way too much fun writing my Admin supplement for next semester.
For @scotusblog.com, I cover an arcane post-CASA question: Does a class action plaintiff with an inherently transitory claim need to file a protective motion for class certification to invoke the mootness exception for class actions, or is the complaint enough?
www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/stat...
www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/stat...
States seek clarity on class actions in a post-CASA world
In last term’s Trump v. CASA, the Supreme Court curtailed the use of universal injunctions – that is, lower court orders that grant relief to everyone, even people not involved in […]
www.scotusblog.com
November 13, 2025 at 3:26 PM
For @scotusblog.com, I cover an arcane post-CASA question: Does a class action plaintiff with an inherently transitory claim need to file a protective motion for class certification to invoke the mootness exception for class actions, or is the complaint enough?
www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/stat...
www.scotusblog.com/2025/11/stat...
I’m very honored to have been selected to receive the AALS Administrative Law section’s Emerging Scholar Award for my @stanlrev.bsky.social article “Visions of Vermont Yankee.”
October 29, 2025 at 1:29 PM
I’m very honored to have been selected to receive the AALS Administrative Law section’s Emerging Scholar Award for my @stanlrev.bsky.social article “Visions of Vermont Yankee.”
New from me: Is administrative common law something that we can find in customary agency practices?
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
August 25, 2025 at 4:28 PM
New from me: Is administrative common law something that we can find in customary agency practices?
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
Reposted by Adam Crews
Vermont Yankee is re-emerging as a cornerstone of administrative law. In this Stanford Law Review article, #RutgersLaw Professor @adamgcrews.bsky.social explores how courts are invoking it to limit judicial overreach, revive legislative primacy... (1/2)
July 14, 2025 at 1:22 PM
Vermont Yankee is re-emerging as a cornerstone of administrative law. In this Stanford Law Review article, #RutgersLaw Professor @adamgcrews.bsky.social explores how courts are invoking it to limit judicial overreach, revive legislative primacy... (1/2)
Re: Consumers’ Research. (I get it, no one cares!)
The Article III problem in the case was a serious one because this legal issue does not “evade review” if petitioners use the right procedural vehicles to mount their challenge. (See below.)
The Court’s resolution is more ipse dixit than analysis.
The Article III problem in the case was a serious one because this legal issue does not “evade review” if petitioners use the right procedural vehicles to mount their challenge. (See below.)
The Court’s resolution is more ipse dixit than analysis.
June 27, 2025 at 8:00 PM
Re: Consumers’ Research. (I get it, no one cares!)
The Article III problem in the case was a serious one because this legal issue does not “evade review” if petitioners use the right procedural vehicles to mount their challenge. (See below.)
The Court’s resolution is more ipse dixit than analysis.
The Article III problem in the case was a serious one because this legal issue does not “evade review” if petitioners use the right procedural vehicles to mount their challenge. (See below.)
The Court’s resolution is more ipse dixit than analysis.
I had a baby law prof milestone today: With thanks to Judge Readler of the Sixth Circuit, I got my first judicial citation.
This is all the more existing because the prevailing party was represented by my friend and former co-clerk Matt Rice.
This is all the more existing because the prevailing party was represented by my friend and former co-clerk Matt Rice.
June 9, 2025 at 7:29 PM
I had a baby law prof milestone today: With thanks to Judge Readler of the Sixth Circuit, I got my first judicial citation.
This is all the more existing because the prevailing party was represented by my friend and former co-clerk Matt Rice.
This is all the more existing because the prevailing party was represented by my friend and former co-clerk Matt Rice.
A fun thing about being an absent-minded administrative law professor is that I have a note to myself from 2023 that reads “15 cfr 744 supp 5,” and I look at it every few months and never have the slightest clue what I was hoping to remind myself to do with that.
June 7, 2025 at 7:38 PM
A fun thing about being an absent-minded administrative law professor is that I have a note to myself from 2023 that reads “15 cfr 744 supp 5,” and I look at it every few months and never have the slightest clue what I was hoping to remind myself to do with that.
In a rush to criticize an entity that shits all over civil servants (DOGE), this framing ends up … shitting all over a civil servant who made an honest error.
John Roberts isn’t at his keyboard hitting “send” on this stuff himself.
John Roberts isn’t at his keyboard hitting “send” on this stuff himself.
Oh, well, apparently in the Supreme Court's eagerness to let DOGE do whatever it wants with no public scrutiny, the court also accidentally made information about the new orders public — "an apparent software malfunction" — so they published the orders list on Friday evening instead of Monday.
June 7, 2025 at 6:09 PM
In a rush to criticize an entity that shits all over civil servants (DOGE), this framing ends up … shitting all over a civil servant who made an honest error.
John Roberts isn’t at his keyboard hitting “send” on this stuff himself.
John Roberts isn’t at his keyboard hitting “send” on this stuff himself.
The Trump/Elon thing is for Pride, right? Because it’s so camp? Like, this has to be being done just for the gays?
June 5, 2025 at 9:59 PM
The Trump/Elon thing is for Pride, right? Because it’s so camp? Like, this has to be being done just for the gays?
My latest article, Visions of Vermont Yankee, is now in print.
review.law.stanford.edu/print/articl...
review.law.stanford.edu/print/articl...
Visions of <em>Vermont Yankee</em> | Stanford Law Review
review.law.stanford.edu
May 19, 2025 at 11:50 AM
My latest article, Visions of Vermont Yankee, is now in print.
review.law.stanford.edu/print/articl...
review.law.stanford.edu/print/articl...
Heading to my favorite city (DC) to do my favorite thing (complain about the 1970s DC Circuit).
May 7, 2025 at 2:36 PM
Heading to my favorite city (DC) to do my favorite thing (complain about the 1970s DC Circuit).
Got called for jury duty and was very predictably cut for being a law professor (because heaven forbid someone know what he’s talking about!!!), but I would like to send all my best wishes to the plaintiff, who was very, very hot.
May 2, 2025 at 5:34 PM
Got called for jury duty and was very predictably cut for being a law professor (because heaven forbid someone know what he’s talking about!!!), but I would like to send all my best wishes to the plaintiff, who was very, very hot.
My most right-wing take is that we should impose the death penalty on PATCO riders who aren’t smart enough to allow two lanes of foot traffic into and out of the station.
April 22, 2025 at 12:49 PM
My most right-wing take is that we should impose the death penalty on PATCO riders who aren’t smart enough to allow two lanes of foot traffic into and out of the station.
I wonder if this is the type of stupid gimmick that the Founders might have deemed sufficient cause to refuse to seat Wisconsin’s congressional delegation, on the ground that Wisconsin no longer has a republican form of government.
BREAKING: The Wisconsin governor can lock in a school funding increase for 400 years using his veto power, the state Supreme Court ruled.
Wisconsin governor can lock in 400-year school funding increase using a veto, court says
The Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that the Democratic governor legally used the state’s uniquely powerful veto to lock in a school funding increase for 400 years.
bit.ly
April 18, 2025 at 7:22 PM
I wonder if this is the type of stupid gimmick that the Founders might have deemed sufficient cause to refuse to seat Wisconsin’s congressional delegation, on the ground that Wisconsin no longer has a republican form of government.
Me, teaching Admin this semester: “Damn I wish stuff would slow down for, like, a day so I can keep on track with my syllabus.”
Me, having just been assigned Fed Courts for next year: “Damn this would be such a fun and exciting time to be teaching this class!!!”
Me, having just been assigned Fed Courts for next year: “Damn this would be such a fun and exciting time to be teaching this class!!!”
April 8, 2025 at 1:00 AM
Me, teaching Admin this semester: “Damn I wish stuff would slow down for, like, a day so I can keep on track with my syllabus.”
Me, having just been assigned Fed Courts for next year: “Damn this would be such a fun and exciting time to be teaching this class!!!”
Me, having just been assigned Fed Courts for next year: “Damn this would be such a fun and exciting time to be teaching this class!!!”
I forgot how much more fun it is to people watch at a bar in LA than in Philly.
April 6, 2025 at 1:03 AM
I forgot how much more fun it is to people watch at a bar in LA than in Philly.
Had to break the hard news to the boyfriend that the article I’ve been working on forever is actually my longest relationship.
April 3, 2025 at 11:16 PM
Had to break the hard news to the boyfriend that the article I’ve been working on forever is actually my longest relationship.
Reposted by Adam Crews
Excited to share my latest manuscript, Ghostwriting the Government, on SSRN (comments welcome!): papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
A 🧵:
A 🧵:
Ghostwriting the Government
<p><span>Ghostwriting is when a writer prepares materials to be issued under someone else’s name. It is very common and sometimes unseemly, but why? Ghostwritin
papers.ssrn.com
April 1, 2025 at 6:38 PM
Excited to share my latest manuscript, Ghostwriting the Government, on SSRN (comments welcome!): papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
A 🧵:
A 🧵:
My take on the FCC v. Consumers’ Research argument:
“If I were the government, I would feel pretty good right now,” Adam Crews, a law professor at Rutgers who represented the FCC during previous proceedings, told CNET.
www.cnet.com/home/interne...
“If I were the government, I would feel pretty good right now,” Adam Crews, a law professor at Rutgers who represented the FCC during previous proceedings, told CNET.
www.cnet.com/home/interne...
The Supreme Court Doesn’t Seem Eager to Axe This $9 Billion Broadband Subsidy
Lawyers for a conservative non-profit called the program a “bureaucrat's dream.”
www.cnet.com
March 27, 2025 at 11:19 AM
My take on the FCC v. Consumers’ Research argument:
“If I were the government, I would feel pretty good right now,” Adam Crews, a law professor at Rutgers who represented the FCC during previous proceedings, told CNET.
www.cnet.com/home/interne...
“If I were the government, I would feel pretty good right now,” Adam Crews, a law professor at Rutgers who represented the FCC during previous proceedings, told CNET.
www.cnet.com/home/interne...
Happy FCC v. Consumers’ Research day!
This is a hugely important separation of powers case—both on the merits and in the sense that it doesn’t belong in an Article III court at all.
This is a hugely important separation of powers case—both on the merits and in the sense that it doesn’t belong in an Article III court at all.
The Supreme Court will hear a potentially very important case on the nondelegation doctrine this Wednesday.
Over at the Notice & Comment Blog, I have some thoughts on the least sexy issue in the case: Whether there’s even Article III standing.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/the-redre...
Over at the Notice & Comment Blog, I have some thoughts on the least sexy issue in the case: Whether there’s even Article III standing.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/the-redre...
The Redressability Problem in FCC v. Consumers’ Research, by Adam Crews - Yale Journal on Regulation
FCC v. Consumers’ Research (set to be argued on March 26) presents the Supreme Court with its latest chance to revitalize the nondelegation doctrine. The case centers on the multi-billion dollar unive...
www.yalejreg.com
March 26, 2025 at 1:33 PM
Happy FCC v. Consumers’ Research day!
This is a hugely important separation of powers case—both on the merits and in the sense that it doesn’t belong in an Article III court at all.
This is a hugely important separation of powers case—both on the merits and in the sense that it doesn’t belong in an Article III court at all.
The Supreme Court will hear a potentially very important case on the nondelegation doctrine this Wednesday.
Over at the Notice & Comment Blog, I have some thoughts on the least sexy issue in the case: Whether there’s even Article III standing.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/the-redre...
Over at the Notice & Comment Blog, I have some thoughts on the least sexy issue in the case: Whether there’s even Article III standing.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/the-redre...
The Redressability Problem in FCC v. Consumers’ Research, by Adam Crews - Yale Journal on Regulation
FCC v. Consumers’ Research (set to be argued on March 26) presents the Supreme Court with its latest chance to revitalize the nondelegation doctrine. The case centers on the multi-billion dollar unive...
www.yalejreg.com
March 24, 2025 at 6:12 PM
The Supreme Court will hear a potentially very important case on the nondelegation doctrine this Wednesday.
Over at the Notice & Comment Blog, I have some thoughts on the least sexy issue in the case: Whether there’s even Article III standing.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/the-redre...
Over at the Notice & Comment Blog, I have some thoughts on the least sexy issue in the case: Whether there’s even Article III standing.
www.yalejreg.com/nc/the-redre...
My boyfriend, a domestic terrorist, just tried to insist that we “don’t have assigned sides of the bed” at a hotel.
March 23, 2025 at 3:19 AM
My boyfriend, a domestic terrorist, just tried to insist that we “don’t have assigned sides of the bed” at a hotel.
Two things can be true at once:
1) Trump’s targeting law firms for political reasons is bad.
2) Paul Weiss’s resolving that dispute by agreeing to (*re-checks notes*) help veterans and fight antisemitism (as opposed to, like, free legal services for J6ers?) is actually good.
1) Trump’s targeting law firms for political reasons is bad.
2) Paul Weiss’s resolving that dispute by agreeing to (*re-checks notes*) help veterans and fight antisemitism (as opposed to, like, free legal services for J6ers?) is actually good.
March 21, 2025 at 2:46 PM
Two things can be true at once:
1) Trump’s targeting law firms for political reasons is bad.
2) Paul Weiss’s resolving that dispute by agreeing to (*re-checks notes*) help veterans and fight antisemitism (as opposed to, like, free legal services for J6ers?) is actually good.
1) Trump’s targeting law firms for political reasons is bad.
2) Paul Weiss’s resolving that dispute by agreeing to (*re-checks notes*) help veterans and fight antisemitism (as opposed to, like, free legal services for J6ers?) is actually good.
Anora is not a good movie. After we watched it, I described it to my boyfriend as “literally pointless—a movie with no point.” It’s 20 minutes too long, the dialogue falls apart halfway through, and not a single character grows from the experience. Pointless and bad.
March 3, 2025 at 11:33 AM
Anora is not a good movie. After we watched it, I described it to my boyfriend as “literally pointless—a movie with no point.” It’s 20 minutes too long, the dialogue falls apart halfway through, and not a single character grows from the experience. Pointless and bad.