El mandato de vacunación obligatoria y las agencias administrativas: la disyuntiva entre el estado administrativo y el estado de derecho (comentario a la Sentencia del Tribunal Supremo de Estados Unidos de 13 de enero de 2022, NFIB V. OSHA).

Bibliographic References

• Beermann, J. M., (2010). End the failed Chevron experiment now: How Chevron has failed and why it can and should be overruled. Connecticut Law Review, Vol. 42, Nº 3, pp. 779-851.
• Driesen, D. M. (2022). Major Questions and Juristocracy. The regulatory review, Disponible en: https://www.theregreview.org/2022/01/31/driesen-major-questions-juristocracy/
• Hamburguer, P. (2014). ¿Is Administrative Law Unlawful?, The University Of Chicago Press, 2014.
• Laguna Paz, J. C. (2021). American disputes over the “administrative state. Revista Aragonesa de Administración Pública. Nº 57, Zaragoza, pp. 371 – 376.
• Pérez Alonso, J. (2010). p. 344.
• Pérez Alonso, J. (2011). ¿El ocaso de Chevron?: Auge y fracaso de la doctrina de la deferencia judicial hacia el ejecutivo, Revista de Administración Pública, Nº 184, Madrid, pp. 325-348.
• Pierce, R. J. (Jr). (2020). Delegation’s Critics Should Be Careful What They Wish For, The Regulatory Review, Disponible en: https://www.theregreview.org/2020/06/15/piercedelegation-critics-careful-what-they-wish/
• Pierce, R. J. (Jr). (2022). Vaccine Mandates and Roads Not Taken. The regulatory review. Disponible en: https://www.theregreview.org/2022/01/24/pierce-vaccine-mandates-roads-not-taken/
• Ryu, A. (2020). Chevron´s Two Bodies. The Dartmouth Law Journal, Vol. XVIII:2, pp. 72-127.
• Sebring, M. (2020). The Major Rules Doctrine: How Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s Novel Doctrine Can Bridge the Gap Between the Chevron and Nondelegation Doctrines, New York University Journal of Law and Liberty, Vol. 12, Nº 1.
• Sustein, C. R y Vermeule, A, Law and Leviathan: Redeeming the Administrative State, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge. 2020, pp. 4.
• Whittington, K, E y Iulinao, J (2017). The Myth of the nondelegation doctrine, University of Pennsilvania Law Review, Vol. 165:379.