Administrative Law (week 3)

What is the rationale to have Gov’t Agencies

• created by congress

• expertise is need in certain fields

• efficiency - more efficient

• insulated from politics

What does agency “capture” mean?

• happens when a government group meant to protect the public instead helps the companies it is supposed to watch.

Ex. Mine operations will get tipped off before inspectors come and they’ll make it look like they’re in compliance when they’re not.

Potential problems and challenges that agencies face:

• Agency “capture”

• Scientific uncertainty

  • They thought DDT didn’t pose any env. harm but eventually discovered it was (science changes over time)

• Cost - benefit analysis

  • have to weigh and balance envtl, health, socioeconomic factors

What is the Delegation Doctrine

• agencies have no inherent authority

• (based on separation of powers) congress may delegate it authority to agencies

• agencies are not allow to exceed statutory authority

Congress →…….→ ……

Statute → Agency → Regulations

How can agency actions & decisions be challenged?

1. Appeal to agency

   1. agency holds hearing

   2. agency makes decision = adjudication

2. Lawsuits asking court to review agency = judicial review

   1. plaintiffs must appeal to agency

   2. final agency action = exhaustion of agency

Judicial Review of Agency Actions

• Lawsuit challenging agency action

• court review agency action

• court determines whether agency ……

3 Main Questions in Adminsitrative Law

1. is Judicial Review available for a specific plaintiff?

2. What standard of review does court use?

3. what are the bases for a court to overturn agency action?(decision by court its illegal)

3 factors for judicial review availability

• administrative procedure act (APA) right of judicial review

  • A person suffering legal wrong because of agency action … is entitled to judicial review

• statutory citizen’s suit provision (eg ESA, CWA)

  • clause in a federal law that allows private citizens and public interest groups to file civil lawsuits in federal court to enforce compliance when government agencies fail to do so

• standing

  • legal right of a person or group to bring a lawsuit or participate in a court case.

  • according to the us constitution ‘judicial power shall extend to all cases & controversies’

  • key question: does person have legal right to file a specific suit?

2 exemptions for judicial review

• congress exempts the agency action in another statute

• agency action is “committed to agency discretion by law”

Citizen suit provision in statutes

• CAA, CWA, ESA, RCRA

Overton Park V. Lope

• The Department of Transportation (DOT) wanted to build I-40 through Overton Park, a public park in Memphis, Tennessee. There were other possible routes, but the DOT did not adequately consider alternatives.

• no statute specifically saying that the DOT's action was exempt from judicial review

• The “committed to agency discretion” exception is very narrow. Courts will generally review agency actions and examine whether the agency followed the law

Judicial Branch has interest in limiting access to courts because:

• efficiency

• “ripeness”

• Right “pi”?, best “pi”?

• Redressable?

Sierra Club v. Morton

• Mineral King Valley was under NFS

• NFS put out a bid to build a large ski resort

• Sierra Club didn’t think that was a good use of MKV

  • argues this decision is going to violate NEPA and ESA possibly

• Supreme court said they had no standing

  • Sierra Clubs concern doesn’t get taken to court

• They had a general interest in it but no specific injury to show (no standing according to courts)

Lujan V. Defenders of Wildlife

A federal agency, AID (agency for international development), was allowed to avoid certain Endangered Species Act (ESA) consultation requirements for projects outside the United States. Environmentalists challenged this rule because they were concerned about endangered species in those areas.

• Although the ESA allowed citizens to sue, the Supreme Court held that a citizen-suit provision does not automatically give someone constitutional standing.

3 Part Lujan Standing Test

injury in fact?

• concrete and particularized - injury affects this person specifically

• actual or imminent - has happened or will actually happen

causation

• their injury is traceable to the government action

redressability

• show that a favorable court decision would likely remedy their injury

Significance of Lujan

• prior to Lujan if citizens suit provision then standing clearly existed

• after Lujan standing may not exist even if citizens suit provision

Chevron Doctrine

2 part approach used by courts to analyze whether an agency decision is authorized by a statute

1. did congress address the precise question in the statute?

   1. review language, history

2. If answer to 1 is no court decides if agency regulation is a reasonable interpretation

Congress passes a statute → the statute is unclear → an agency creates a regulation interpreting it → someone challenges the regulation in court.

The court has to decide: Who gets to interpret the unclear statute—the court or the agency?

What did Loper Bright Change

• The Supreme Court overruled Chevron.

  After Loper Bright:

  A statute is ambiguous → the court does NOT automatically defer to the agency.

  Instead:

  The court must interpret the statute itself.

  And this remains true even if the statute involves complicated technical or scientific subject matter.

Before vs. After Loper Bright

Before Loper — Chevron

Congress unclear
→ Agency interprets statute
→ Court asks whether interpretation is reasonable
→ If reasonable, defer to agency

After Loper — Loper Bright

Congress unclear
→ Court interprets the statute itself
→ Agency expertise may help inform the court
→ But ambiguity alone does NOT require deference