The document provides an overview of administrative law, including its origins and meanings. It discusses how administrative law seeks to reduce arbitrariness and unfairness in bureaucratic government through several key principles and cases. It explains that administrative law developed from judicial decisions and statutes to establish standards of due process that administrative agencies must follow, such as requiring a full and fair hearing as outlined in the Morgan v. United States Supreme Court case. It also discusses how Goldberg v. Kelly established that due process requires a hearing prior to terminating welfare benefits.

1. Administrative Law
The Origins and Meanings
of Administrative Law

2. 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.

3. 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

4. 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?

5. 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.”

6. 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

8. 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

9. 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?

10. 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

11. 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.

15. 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.

16. 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)

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. 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)

20. 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

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. Case Analysis
 Why were Goldberg and Eldridge decided
differently?
 The Court differentiated the facts of Eldridge
from those of Goldberg.
 Stare decisis

25. Theme Four: What is
Administrative Law?

26. 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.

27. “Administrative law boils down to a dialogue or
political debate about just what is procedurally
fair in modern politics and government.”