What is Administrative Law and what are its Rules and Procedures

1. Administrative Law
Administrative Law and Administrative Agencies
Rules and Procedures

2. Concept of Separation of Powers
• What is “Administrative Law?”
• The laws that define the legal powers of government agencies
• What is the origin of Administrative Law?
• The Constitutional Separation of Powers
• Government has three main functions:
• The creation of laws – through legislatures
• The execution of laws – through the President
• The resolution of disputes under law – through the judicial branch, the courts

3. Creation of Administrative Agencies
• The Creation of Laws – through legislatures
• The legislature creates a law or statute to serve a public interest and/or solve a specific problem
• To implement a law/statute, Congress creates a department or administrative agency
• Administrative agencies are to solve a set of specific problems and/or provide services to
individuals as prescribed by a law
• Administrative agencies also must extend the protection of law to citizens
• Agencies are to extend the protection of law or their decisions are not enforceable
The U.S. Constitution protects the basic rights of citizens – “nor shall any state deprive any person
of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” – 14th Amendment

4. The Source of Power of Administrative
Agencies
• A role of an administrative agency is to solve problems of public interest and serve the people
• For an administrative agency to fulfil its role, a legislature can provide the agency powers to:
• Set standards
• Make rules and regulations
• Prosecute those that refuse to follow the regulations
• Make decisions on those actions that come before it in claims and hearings
• Investigate complaints

5. The Delegation Doctrine
• Per Article 1, Section 1 of the Constitution only Congress has the power to enact laws
• However, Congress or the judiciary branch do not have the ability to handle the
tremendous volume of daily work or the expertise to solve problems of public interest and
serve the people
• The Doctrine appeared during the Depression recovery era of the 1930’s
• In Arizona v. California, 373 U.S. 546 (1963) the U.S. Supreme Court allowed the delegation of
power to the Secretary of the Interior because Congress set a standard for the Secretary of
the Interior to follow
• The judicial function of government to an administrative agency when Congress allows the
agency to conduct hearings

6. The Delegation Doctrine
• In Martin v. Occupational Safety and Health Review Comm’n, 499 U.S. 144, 150 (1991) the court
recognized “the normal complement of adjudicative powers by traditional administrative agencies”
• The Supreme Court in FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc., 129 S. Ct. 1800, 1813-1817 (2009) further
confirmed the theory of the Delegation Doctrine
• The Delegation Doctrine adapts Article 1 into the practical functions of governing
• Without the Delegation Doctrine, government could not take action to solve problems of public
interest or serve the people
• The Delegation Doctrine allows a limited transfer of power from Congress, and the Judicial and
Executive branches

7. Boundaries to the Allocated Powers
• Legislatures direct the agencies in enacting laws by establishing guidelines that must be
followed, thus limiting the powers of the agencies
• The guidelines can be no more than a statement of a purpose to be accomplished by the
agency
• Such statements of purpose can be very explicit in the limits placed on an agency
• The agencies develop standards through rules and regulations using the legislative
guidelines
• In Yakus v. United States, 321 U.S. 414 (1944) the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that a
correct and legal delegation to an agency is accomplished with standards established by
Congress and these standards are followed by the agency

8. The Intelligible Principle
• Congress must establish an intelligible principle if an agency is to set standards
• The intelligible principle is the test for measuring the appropriateness of the legislative criteria for setting
standards given to an agency
• The intelligible principle test requires that the legislature set standards that are specific enough on which
an agency can base detailed, fair rules
• If Congress (or a state legislature) has not provided this intelligible principle with standards for the
guidance of the administrators’ actions, it would be impossible to ascertain whether the will of Congress
was being obeyed
• Only by using the intelligible principle test can a court justify overriding Congress’ choice of means for
effecting public policy
• See Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc., 531 U.S. 457 (2001) and Mistretta v. United States,
488 U.S. 361 (1989) for an example of the U.S. Supreme Court using the intelligible principle

9. Claims and Hearings
• A claim is a complaint, a petition, and a request for assistance from an administrative
agency
• The basis of a person’s right to make a claim is the Fourth Amendment right to “life,
liberty, and property”
• A claim is a benefit a person is entitled to under the “property” section of the
amendment
• In Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564 (1972) the U.S. Supreme Court defined
“benefits” as property, thus definitely qualifying claims as Fourth Amendment rights
• In Goldberg v. Kelly, 397 U.S. 254 (19700 the U.S. Supreme Court allowed due process
rights to any citizen receiving government benefits

10. Claims
• The methods for processing a claim, deciding on a claim, and resolving disputes about
claims are largely left to the discretion of the administrative agency
• In Mathew v. Eldridge, 96 S.Ct. 893 (1976) the U.S. Supreme Court established a
balancing test for determine how much due process is due
• First, the private interest that would be affected by the official action
• Second, the risk of an erroneous deprivation of such interest through the procedures used
• Third, the Government’s interest, including the fiscal and administrative burdens that the
additional procedural requirement would entail

11. Administrative Agency Hearings
• When individual or business does not comply with agency regulations or a
person contests an agency’s initial decision, a hearing to determine facts and
laws may result
• The hearing can be initiated by the agency filing a complaint or by an aggrieved
party making a request appealing an agency decision
• Procedures of notice, discovery, and the fundamental rights of due process
prevail during the hearing process, but differ significantly from court proceedings

12. What is a Hearning and When is it
Needed?
• Hearings, or adjudications, in administrative agencies are similar to lower level civil or criminal
court trials
• The procedures for administrative agency hearings are formulated in agency statutes and
administrative procedures acts
• The term “hearing” refers to a hearing before an administrative law judge (ALJ)
• In many state proceedings, hearings are conducted before hearing officials or a panal
• Hearings are held after all other processes offered by the agency to each to each agreement
have been exhausted
• In Louisiana Association of Independent Producers and Royalty Owners v. Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 958 F.2d 1101 (D.C. Cir. 1992) the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed
agency rights to decide hearing methods

13. Steps to Obtaining a Hearing
Using Department of Housing and Urban Development Hearing Rules and
Procedures as an Example
• The rules and procedures to be followed for all agencies are in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR).
• First, the person contesting the agency decision files a notice of appeal stating the intention to
appeal specifically addressing all alleged violations set forth in the decision in dispute
• Second, the appeal is given a docket number and a file is opened. A notice of docketing is
sent to the person filing the appeal (appellant)
• Third, the respondent has to answer the complaint within the time and using the procedure
set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 25
• Fourth, the ALJ may, either on the motion of a party or its own motion, schedule a prehearing
conference similar to a Pretrial Conference under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure

14. Pre-Hearing Procedures
• Pre-hearing procedures generally include notice, parties, discovery, and conferences
• Specific pre-hearing procedures of the agency can be found in the CFR
• Notice –
• all parties must receive notice of an impending hearing
• The notice informs the parties of the time of the hearing, the type of hearing, the place of the hearing, and the laws that
relate to the hearing
• Parties –
• those named as participants in the hearing, usually the appellant and the respondent, are the parties
• All parties must receive copies of all written documents pertaining to the hearing filed with the Agency
• Discovery –
• unlike court cases, discovery is not a guaranteed right; each agency administers its own rules for discovery
• If discovery is allowed, depositions, interrogatories, production of documents, and stipulations are common
procedures

15. Hearings
• Administrative hearings have procedures similar to court hearings – opening statements, witness
examination, and court examination, presentation of evidence, closing arguments
• Participants in a hearing – aside from the interested parties –
• Attorneys, paralegals, the judge, and the witnesses
• The ALJ is an employee of the administrative agency and is empowered to,
• Conduct the hearing and preside at the hearing
• Make decisions on evidence, procedural requests, and findings
• Make the decision at the conclusion of the hearing
• Perform other actions authorized by the agency
• The ALJ maintains some independence from the agency

16. Hearings
• Paralegals
• Assist in all procedures and stages of hearings whether working for the appellant’s attorney, the respondent’s attorneys,
or the agency (The Administrative Procedures Act Section 555(b) allows representation by an attorney “or other duly
qualified representative in an agency proceeding.” HUD 24 C.F.R. Section 26.7 allows for representation by an individual
who is not an attorney “upon an adequate showing, as determined by the hearing officer, that the individual possesses
the legal, technical, or other qualifications necessary to advise and assist in the presentation of the case”
• Expert Witnesses
• The ALJ may declare certain facts as true, thus not needing proof to substantiate that the fact is true
• The expertise of the judge is referred to as the procedure of “official notice”
• Official notice may be approved by the parties in the case
• Other Witnesses
• Witnesses are sworn in, but the party seeking cross-examination must point to any specific weaknesses in the proof
which can be further developed through cross examination

17. Stages of a Hearing
• Presentation of Evidence
• Hearsay is often admissible (See Richardson v. Perales, 401 U.S. 389 (1971)
• Generally, an ALJ will admit all the evidence presented then sift through the
evidence determining which evidence is more important and more trustworthy than
other evidence
• As a check, the judge must demonstrate on what the decision was based; reliable,
competent evidence must support the judge’s decision

18. Stages of a Hearing
• Proof
• Producing evidence and persuading the judge is called the burden of proof
• The burden of proof is usually on the party who has initiated the action
• A preponderance of the evidence (51 percent or greater) is the standard by which
the judge decides if there is enough evidence to prove a party’s case
• In Steadman v. SEC, 450 U.S. 91 (1981) the U.S. Supreme upheld the standard of
preponderance of evidence standard of proof

19. Stages of a Hearing
Findings
• Findings ae the results and conclusions arrived at after the evidence has been
presented
• An administrative hearing has two types of findings:
• Proposed findings by the parties after the hearing and before the decision
• Findings presented by the judge to back up the decision

20. Stages of a Hearing
Hearing Decisions
• Although the ALJ makes a decision the agency issues the final decision
Forms of Decision
• The agency allows the ALJ to issue an initial decision
• This decision is upheld by the agency and becomes final if it is not contested or
appealed
• If the decision is appealed, the head officer reviews all parts of the case then the
agency issues the decision which can be appealed to courts

21. Stages of a Hearing
Standards and Reasons for Decisions
• All ALJ decisions have to state the reasons upon which they are based
• The agency is the trier of fact
• It must explain how the facts influenced the decision that was made, to include what
conclusions were made and how they were based on the facts and laws
• See Gonzalez v. Freeman, 334 F.2d. 570 (D.C. Cir. 1964) for a court review of the
required procedures

22. Judicial Review
• Judicial review is the power of the courts to examine and review agency
decisions based on the rules, regulations, and orders of an administrative
agency
• Both the law and the findings of fact made may be judicially reviewed
• Before seeking judicial review, the party must complete any appeal
process within the agency, allowing the agency the opportunity to correct
itself
• This is known as exhaustion of administrative remedies

23. Judicial Review
• Any agency’s enabling statute will generally state which court has
jurisdiction for judicial review of the agency’s decisions
• Judicial review is applicable to administrative agencies on all government
levels – municipal, county, state and federal
• Standards and requirements established by laws and procedures govern
access to judicial review of an agency decision
• The court must determine that the person or entities seeking juridical
review have standing

24. Judicial Review
• Judicial review not only resolves the complaint of the injured party
seeking judicial review, but also may result in the eventual change of a
regulation
• Courts are granted the power and authority to review administrative
agency decisions in two ways:
• The stature creating the agency allows for judicial review
• Federal and state constitutions or federal and state general statutes

25. Judicial Review Prerequisites
• Standing
• Standing requires that the party questioning the legality of the agency action have a
personal interest and an injury associated with the agency decision
• Ripeness
• Ripeness determines if the controversy has matured enough to permit judicial
review
• The hardship or injury must be demonstrated as actual and real, not abstract
• See Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner, 387 U.S. 136 (1967) for an example of what the
U.S. Supreme Court considered a case “ripe”

26. Judicial Review Prerequisites
• Exhaustion
• Exhaustion requires that a party use all administrative processes and remedies before seeking
judicial review in a court
• The steps and processes of the administrative agency must be followed to establish the record
of the case with facts determined by experts in the area of dispute
• After the agency’s final decision, then, and only then, can judicial review be considered
• Primary Jurisdiction
• Primary jurisdiction is the concept that the court will refrain from acting on a case brought
before it until the agency’s renders decisions on issues requiring its expertise

27. Scope of Judicial Review
• After the court is satisfied that the procedural requirements for judicial review have been
met, the court determines if the case fits within the court’s scope of review
• The scope of review is the range and limits to which court examination of an agency
decision is bound
• Although the court is allowed to review both questions of law and fact, basically, it is the
court’s role to interpret the law and the agency’s role to determine the facts
• The courts only review the record of the agency; however, the court does have the power
to hear new evidence in a de novo review