Whether this Non-Delegation Doctrine challenge to the constitutional authority of an agency was properly filed in district court, or whether an agency order extinguishes district court jurisdiction?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The Non-Delegation Doctrine is a staple of the separation of powers. Private property, despite its erosion in Kelo, remains the safeguard of liberty. But during the New Deal era, America witnessed a massive expansion of the administrative state. After Schechter Poultry in 1935, federal courts began applying the “intelligible principle test”’—a lax standard detached from traditional separation of powers principles. For 90 years, unelected agencies have wielded illegitimate legislative powers delegated to them by Congress to accomplish controversial goals (like seizing Cletus’s private property for private gain) while avoiding political accountability. This case seeks to re-establish those constitutional boundaries. But the D.C. Circuit has twice denied Landowners their day in court for “lack of jurisdiction,” even after this Court remanded this case in Bohon v. FERC, 1438 S. Ct. 1779 (2023). Despite this Court’s 9-0 ruling in Axon and Cochran, the D.C. Circuit reinstated its vacated decision. The questions presented are: Whether this Non-Delegation Doctrine challenge to the constitutional authority of an agency was properly filed in district court, or whether an agency order extinguishes district court jurisdiction? Whether non-party plaintiffs are precluded from raising constitutional challenges because the district court loses jurisdiction the minute a different plaintiff files a different case with the agency? Whether §324 of the Fiscal Responsibility Act, enacted to bypass environmental cases in the Fourth ii Circuit, strips jurisdiction over this constitutional case, too, even though this Court has never allowed Congress to strip courts of jurisdiction to police its constitutional violations? Jf the inquiry does not end there, whether §324 is unconstitutional?