1. Do you believe that public health legal interventions (regulation, tort reforms, etc.) should be limited to those instances where a threat to public health presents a "clear and present danger", or is the appropriate scope of public health law broader than that standard allows? In answering this question, it might be helpful to discuss some specific public health issues that would, or would not, be subject to regulation based on the "clear and present danger" standard.
2. What are opinions on the Chevron doctrine - how much deference should be given to regulatory agencies in defining the terms of their own statutes?