Administrative Law

The Origins and Meanings of Administrative Law

Introduction We covered five themes to start out our discussion

of administrative law: Bureaucratic government has existed in varying degrees

in nearly all organized political systems. The effects of administrative government influence us

literally every moment of our lives. Bureaucratic government has provided no utopian cure

for the shortcomings of capitalism. Administrative law seeks to reduce the tendency

toward arbitrariness and unfairness in bureaucratic government.

Administrative law is a relatively new and open-ended field of law.

Defining Administrative Law Administrative Law – branches of the public law dealing

with the structure, authority, policies, and procedures of administrative and regulatory agencies.

Administrative Law – important body of U.S. law pertaining to the legal authority of public administrative entities to perform their duties, and to the limits necessary to control those agencies.

Administrative law has been created by: Judicial decisions Statutes

Administrative law does not include the substantive rules and regulations that administrative make. This is called: Regulatory Law

The Rule of Law and Administrative Law

Rule of law vs. rule of men Rule of law – the idea that law, not the

discretion of officials, should govern public affairs.

Discretion?

What is Law? Herbert Jacob: “Authoritative rules made by

government…intended to bind government itself, people and institutions outside government, or both.”

Benjamin Cardozo and Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.: Law is “a principle or rule of conduct so established as to justify a prediction with reasonable certainty that it will be enforced by courts of its authority if challenged.” “…the prophecies of what the courts will do in fact, and

nothing more pretentious, are what I mean by law.” Lief Carter: “Law is the legal process lawyers and judges

use when they try to prevent or resolve human problems using rules made by the state as their starting point.”

Types of Law Public Law and Private Law

Private – rights and obligations that private individuals and institutions have when they relate to one another (civil law).

Examples: marriage, contracts, and personal injury. Public – addresses the relationship that individuals and institutions

have with the state as a sovereign entity, and with the structure and operation of government itself.

Preserve and protect citizens within its jurisdiction Also the obligations that citizens have to the government Or the obiligations the government has to its citizens. (provide security) Examples: paying taxes, serving in the armed forces. Subcategories

Administrative Law Rulemaking Adjudication Administrative Procedure Act

Constitutional Law Criminal Law

The Development of Administrative Law

Brief History Administrative Procedure Act (APA) – a

1946 Act of Congress specifying rulemaking (§ 553) and adjudication (§ 554).

Administrative Procedure Act Governs:

Governs: Adjudication (quasi-judicial function of agencies) Rulemaking (quasi-legislative function of agencies) Discretion of administrative agencies (guiding statutes) Judicial review

Morgan v. United States, 304 U.S. 1 (1938)

Facts: In 1921, Congress passed the Packers and Stockyards Act which gave authority to the

Secretary of Agriculture to set maximum charges stockyard operators could charge for their services.

Congress used rather vague language stating that the secretary could specify maximum “just and reasonable” charges.

In 1930, the Department notified Morgan that he was to appear in a hearing before the agency in reference to his prices.

The hearing process was lengthy and generated a large record of evidence, which the secretary did not initially review instead delegating the responsibility to subordinates.

Morgan challenged at the Supreme Court claiming that a full hearing was not provided and the Court remanded the case back to the agency agreeing with Morgan.

The new secretary reviewed the record and ordered Morgan to lower prices. Morgan again challenged the agency’s decision arguing that he was not allowed to

see the complaint against him and that he never saw the final report of the agency. Legal Question:

Did the Department of Agriculture follow appropriate administrative standards of review when making a determination of whether Morgan’s prices were set too high under the Packers and Stockyards Act of 1921?

Morgan v. United States, 304 U.S. 1 (1938) Holding and Action:

No. Reversed. Vote:

6 (Hughes, McReynolds, Brandeis, Butler, Stone, Roberts) – 1 (Black) Legal Reasoning (per Chief Justice Hughes):

What basic principle does the court begin by espousing in the case? A basic principle in administrative proceedings that are quasi-judicial in nature is that

they must follow the same values as any other legal proceeding: fair and open hearings.

In this case, Congress specifically stated that the Department must provide a full hearing.

Does it matter the extent to which the secretary examined the record of evidence?

No, even if the Court makes a basic assumption that the secretary fully examined the record, there is still more required of the agency.

Why? Because this does not constitute a full hearing.

What more is required? The right to present evidence Reasonable opportunity to know the claims against you

Morgan v. United States, 304 U.S. 1 (1938)

Were these requirements met by the agency? No, the government never presented specific claims against Morgan.

Congress may not have intended to mimic judicial standards when using the language “full hearing” but they did intend to preserve the essence of the judicial process.

What is that essence? Fairness as an essential part of due process

What about the argument that the agency was only conducting a “general inquiry”? It ignores the realities of the proceeding as it was clear that they

were prosecuting Morgan. Administrative agencies, acting in a judicial capacity, must

follow the basic precept of fair play. The order of the secretary is invalid.

What is Due Process? 5th Amendment:

“No person shall be…deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”

14th Amendment: “…nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property,

without due process of law…” Types of Due Process:

Procedural due process – set of procedures designed to ensure fairness in judicial proceedings.

Formal definition: The minimal requirements of notice and a hearing guaranteed by the Due Process Clauses of

the 5th and 14th Amendments, especially if the deprivation of a significant life, liberty, or property interest may occur.

Substantive due process – law must be fair in content and application. The law must be just and not unfairly deprive persons of life, liberty, or property. Formal definition:

The doctrine that the Due Process Clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments require legislation to be fair and reasonable in content and to further a legitimate governmental objective.

Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970)

Facts: Recipients of welfare aid under Aid to Families with Dependent Children and

New York State’s Home Relief program had their benefits terminated without being afforded a hearing prior to termination.

State law afforded a hearing after termination where recipients could offer evidence, cross-examine witnesses and have a record of the hearing.

If successful at hearing, the recipient would have their benefits reinstated and would receive back payment for erroneously withheld payments.

Recipients challenged the procedure as a violation of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Legal Question: Is a state’s failure to provide a hearing prior to the termination of government

benefits a violation of the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment? Holding and Action:

Yes. Affirmed. Vote:

6 (Douglas, Harlan, Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun) – 3 (Black, Stewart, Burger)

Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970) Legal Reasoning (per Justice Brennan):

What does Brennan begin by doing? He reviews the language and requirements of the federal law and the state law.

Why? We have said that administrative law requires judges to examine the language

in the agency’s guiding statute in order to make a determination. What is the crucial factor that distinguishes welfare benefits from other

types of cases? That the benefits are what the person needs to live and having to wait for a

hearing deprives the person of the necessary aid. Is this the only reason?

No, it helps promote governmental interests in fostering the “dignity and well-being” of persons within its borders.

It also promotes the “General Welfare” under the constitution. What justification does the government provide for having hearings

after benefits have been terminated? Saving the tax payers money and reduces administrative burdens.

What is Brennan’s response to this? There are other means by which to achieve this goal.

Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (1970)

So what is the result? The interests of welfare recipients outweigh the concerns of the government.

What form should the hearing take? Because it would be unreasonable, given the large caseloads, it should not be

a judicial trial, but should “produce an initial determination” of the grounds for discontinuation of benefits.

It should have minimal procedural safeguards: What are those safeguards?

The opportunity to be heard (orally, not written) Hearing must be at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner. The opportunity to confront witnesses and cross-examine The opportunity to present evidence in their favor Decision must be based on the evidence Decision maker should state the basis for their decision Decision maker should be impartial

New York’s post-termination hearing violates the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976) Facts:

George Eldridge began receiving social security disability benefits in spring of 1968 as a result of spinal arthritis that made him unable to work.

It is here that the Court actually skips a large part of Eldridge’s case as he actually filed in court once prior to this case.

In 1972, the SSA reviewed Eldridge’s case and determined that his medical condition had improved enough for him to work a job.

The SSA made this determination by having Eldridge fill out a questionnaire and providing medical sources to support answers.

The SSA terminated Eldridge’s benefits by letter, which provided details regarding the reasoning for the agency’s decision.

Eldridge responded by letter contesting the agencies findings, but the state agency made a final determination that Eldridge was not eligible, which the SSA subsequently adopted.

The SSA informed Eldridge that his benefits would terminate within a month and detailed the appeals procedure.

Eldridge claims that the termination of benefits prior to a hearing is a violation of the Due Process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments.

Legal Question: Does the termination of social security disability benefits prior to an oral hearing violate the Due

Process Clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments? Decision and Action:

No. Reversed. Vote:

6 (Burger, Stewart, White, Blackmun, Powell, Rehnquist) – 2 (Brennan, Marshall)

Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)

Legal Reasoning (per Justice Powell): What is procedural due process according to Powell?

Procedural due process imposes restraints on the government when it strips individuals of their liberty or property.

What is the issue that Powell raises with respect to Due Process? Powell says that Due Process is not a static concept; rather it is a flexible concept

that adapts to “particular situation demands.” Why does that matter?

Because it means the Court must determine if the procedures provided in this situation are sufficient by analyzing the governmental and private interests that are affected.

What factors must to the Court look at to make this determination? The private interest that will be affected by the official action. The risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures

currently used and the value of the addition of additional procedures. The government’s (public) interest:

Fiscal burdens Administrative burdens

Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)

Private interest What makes the private interest asserted here different from the interest asserted in

Goldberg? The person is provided retroactive relief if they prevail. Eligibility is not based on financial need.

Do you agree with this contention? The degree of deprivation is likely to be less than the deprivation described in Goldberg. If there is a delay, other forms of government assistance will kick in.

What is the result of this? The potential deprivation is less than that asserted in Goldberg.

The fairness of the procedures currently used and the potential benefit of additional procedures.

How does Powell compare the nature of the proceedings with Eldridge to that in Goldberg? He says that a medical assessment is much more straightforward than an assessment of financial

need. Really!?! Do you agree with this?

Why does this matter? Because the vast majority of cases are straightforward and involve nonbiased opinions, the benefit of an

additional procedure that would discover problems is minimal. See quote pg. 44.

Does Powell see the existing procedures as adequate? Yes.

Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)

The public interest (administrative burden and societal costs) What are the first burdens that Powell identifies?

The costs associated with an increased number of hearings. The cost of providing benefits to those that are ineligible.

Final points: “The ultimate balance involves a judicial determination as to when, under our

constitutional system, judicial-type procedures must be imposed upon administrative action to assure fairness.”

“The judicial model of an evidentiary hearing is neither a required, nor even the most effective, method of decision making in all circumstances.”

Yes, but is it constitutionally required? “Substantial weight must be given to the good-faith judgments of the

individuals charged by Congress with the administration of social welfare programs…”

What problems do you see with this statement? How does the rule of law relate to this statement?

An evidentiary hearing is not required prior to the termination of social security disability benefits.

Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976)

Dissent (per Justice Brennan): The Court’s assertion that the limited effect

of discontinuing social security benefits on recipients is purely speculative.

The legislation written by Congress presumes a need by the beneficiary and the Court’s decision undermines that presumption.

The argument that there are other benefits available is not an argument in support or opposition of due process.

Case Analysis Why were Goldberg and Eldridge

decided differently? The Court differentiated the facts of

Eldridge from those of Goldberg. Stare decisis

Theme Four: What is Administrative Law?

Theme Five: The Ethics of the Rule of Law in Bureaucratic Government

7 Ethical Meanings of the Rule of Law Constitutions are the supreme law in the United States; the

rule of law therefore requires court to follow the constitution. The rule of law requires judges to enforce statutes as written. The rule of law requires judges to follow precedents. The rule of law refers to a philosophy of justice, not a concept

of “following the law” The rule of law is a philosophy of compromising and balancing

among societal interests. The rule of law seeks to achieve fairness, rationality, and social

equity by promoting public participation in decision making. The rule of law checks and shapes the power of government by

seeking the maximum feasible reduction of arbitrariness.

“Administrative law boils down to a dialogue or political debate about just what is procedurally

fair in modern politics and government.”