Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
National Postal Policy Council, et al. v. Postal Regulatory Commission, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, No. 17-1276, 20-1505, 20-1510, 20-1521 · judgment November 12, 2021
Before the decision, modestly above the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a D.C. Circuit decision below, a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and a petition filed soon after the judgment below.
Question presented
Congress has long established the legal requirements for the postal rate-setting system, a quintessentially legislative task with vast and important policy implications for the country. In 2006, Congress passed the Postal Accountability and Enhancement Act, which imposed various requirements that the system had to meet, including an inflation-adjusted price cap that reflected Congress’s policy judgment that preventing rates from rising faster than inflation would maximize incentives for the Postal Service to reduce costs and increase efficiency. The Act tasked the Postal Regulatory Commission with filling in the system’s details, subject to the statutory requirements. As interpreted by the court below, the Act also gave the Commission power, ten years later, to throw out the statutory requirements and to rewrite the system from scratch, subject only to broad, open-ended, and often competing goals. The Commission-crafted system subjects mailers to price increases that vastly exceed the rate of inflation and imperil many mailers’ very existence—a result for which Congress has no accountability in light of its having “throw[n] the mess into the lap of an administrative agency.” James Skelly Wright, Beyond Discretionary Justice, 81 Yale L.J. 575, 585-86 (1972). The question presented is whether the nondelegation doctrine should be strengthened to disallow Congress from transferring to a federal agency the power to rewrite the postal rate-setting system without establishing any requirements that the system would have to meet.
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Ayesha N. Khan
Potomac Law Group, PLLC
For respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar
Solicitor General
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Jun 27 2022Petition DENIED.
- Jun 07 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/23/2022.
- May 31 2022Reply of petitioners National Postal Policy Council, et al. filed.
- May 18 2022Brief of respondents Postal Regulatory Commission, et al. in opposition filed.
- Mar 28 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is further extended to and including May 18, 2022.
- Mar 25 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from April 18, 2022 to May 18, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Mar 18 2022Brief of respondent Association for Postal Commerce in support filed.
- Feb 24 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including April 18, 2022.
- Feb 23 2022Motion to extend the time to file a response from March 18, 2022 to April 18, 2022, submitted to The Clerk.
- Feb 10 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 18, 2022)