Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Martin v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission (1991) - When adjudication and rule-making power is split between two agencies, court should defer to rule-making agency's interpretations. Auer v. Robbins (1997) - How much deference should an agency interpretation of its own regulations get? United States v.
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Pub. L. 79–404, 60 Stat. 237, enacted June 11, 1946, is the United States federal statute that governs the way in which administrative agencies of the federal government of the United States may propose and establish regulations, and it grants U.S. federal courts oversight over all agency actions. [2]
Administrative law is a division of law governing the activities of executive branch agencies of government. Administrative law includes executive branch rulemaking (executive branch rules are generally referred to as "regulations"), adjudication, and the enforcement of laws.
Administrative discretion allows agencies to use professional expertise and judgment when making decisions or performing official duties, as opposed to only adhering to strict regulations or statuses. For example, a public official has administrative discretion when he or she has the freedom to make a choice among potential courses of action.
Section 551 of the Administrative Procedure Act gives the following definitions: . Rulemaking is "an agency process for formulating, amending, or repealing a rule." A rule in turn is "the whole or a part of an agency statement of general or particular applicability and future effect designed to implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy."
Adjudication is the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation, including legal reasoning set forth by opposing parties or litigants, to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved.
For example, in proceedings before executive branch agencies of the U.S. federal government, fully-formal proceedings of record are governed by the "formal adjudication" or "on the record" provisions of §§ 554, 556, and 557, but informal proceedings or "not on the record" proceedings are governed by § 555.
Administrative law judges may be employed by a "central panel" organization, which provides the judges with independence from agencies. [6] The California Administrative Procedure Act created an early central panel in 1945, and it served as a model for other states. [6] By 2015, over half of states had created such panels. [7]