George Washington Law Review
Bowsher v. Synar is the latest in a series of recent cases in which the Supreme Court has elaborated upon and applied the separation of powers doctrine. The Court has cast many of these decisions in wooden, overly conceptual terms, exposing the Court to criticism that it has imposed an elaborately refined organizational framework upon the federal government going vastly beyond the pragmatic intention of the Framers. Despite the inadequacy of the Court's reasoning, however, this Article contends that, overall, the Court's recent decisions possess an underlying merit: They contain the foundation upon which a new and coherent understanding of the separation of powers principle can be built. As with other juridical principles, 3 the separation principle must be made workable if it is to remain vital. The Court's decisions constitute significant steps in the right direction without imposing unwarranted rigidity upon governmental processes.
Daniel J. Gifford, The Separation of Powers Doctrine and the Regulatory Agencies After Bowsher v. Synar, 55 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 441 (1987), available at http://scholarship.law.umn.edu/faculty_articles/316.