Show simple item record

dc.creatorSinden, Amy
dc.date.accessioned2021-06-21T20:33:15Z
dc.date.available2021-06-21T20:33:15Z
dc.date.issued2016-09-26
dc.identifier.citationAmy Sinden, Supreme Court Remains Skeptical of the “Cost-Benefit State,” The Regulatory Review (Sept. 26, 2016), https://www.theregreview.org/2016/09/26/sinden-cost-benefit-state/.
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12613/6613
dc.format.extent5 pages
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofFaculty/ Researcher Works
dc.relation.haspartThe Regulatory Review
dc.relation.isreferencedbyUniversity of Pennsylvania Law School
dc.rightsAll Rights Reserved
dc.subjectCass Sunstein
dc.subjectCost-benefit analysis
dc.subjectRegulatory cost
dc.titleSupreme Court Remains Skeptical of the “Cost-Benefit State”
dc.typeText
dc.type.genreArticle (Other)
dc.relation.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.34944/dspace/6595
dc.ada.noteFor Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, including help with reading this content, please contact scholarshare@temple.edu
dc.description.schoolcollegeTemple University. James E. Beasley School of Law
dc.temple.creatorSinden, Amy
refterms.dateFOA2021-06-21T20:33:15Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
Sinden-ArticleOther-2016-09.pdf
Size:
269.4Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record