The basic principle of the rulemaking provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act—that an opportunity for public participation fosters the fair and informed exercise of rulemaking authority—is undercut by various categorical exemptions in 5 U.S.C. § 553(a). More than 25 years’ experience with rulemaking under the APA has shown some of these broad exemptions to be neither...
Congress (Recommendations)
Tag cloud
Hide tags
Elimination of the "Military or Foreign Affairs Function" Exemption from APA Rulemaking Requirements
- Recommendation number: 73-5
- Adopted on: December 18, 1973
- Tags: Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Congress, Foreign Affairs, Military, Rulemaking
- Recommendation number: 72-7
- Adopted on: December 15, 1972
- Tags: Congress, Judicial Review, Military, Representation, Selective Service System
Section 10(b)(3) of the Military Selective Service Act, 50 U.S.C. App. § 460(b)(3) (1970), in terms forbids judicial review of administrative determinations relating to the classification and processing of Selective Service registrants, except as incident to criminal prosecutions. In fact, the writ of habeas corpus is available to a registrant who submits to induction and...
- Recommendation number: 72-5
- Adopted on: December 14, 1972
- Tags: Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Congress, Rulemaking, Trial-type Procedures
The Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 553 (1970), provides simple, flexible and efficient procedure for rulemaking, including publication of a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register, opportunity for submission of written comments, and opportunity in the discretion of the agency for oral presentation. This notice-and-comment rulemaking procedure is...
- Recommendation number: 72-2
- Adopted on: June 9, 1972
- Tags: Conflict of Interest, Congress, Indians, Sovereign Immunity
The United States acts as the trustee for the land and water rights of American Indians. Many legal disputes involving these rights, however, are between Indians and agencies of the United States which are charged with responsibility to protect Indian interests. Conflict-of-interest problems arising out of this dual involvement on the part of Federal agencies are troublesome...
- Recommendation number: 70-1
- Adopted on: June 3, 1970
- Tags: Congress, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Judicial Review, Parties Defendant, United States as Defendant, Venue
The size and complexity of the Federal Government, coupled with the intricate and technical law concerning official capacity and parties defendant, have given rise to innumerable cases in which a plaintiff’s claim has been dismissed because the United States or one of its agencies or officers lacked capacity to be sued, was improperly identified, or could not be joined as a...
- Recommendation number: 69-8
- Adopted on: October 22, 1969
- Tags: Administrative Procedure Act (APA), Congress, Public Participation, Rulemaking
Recommendation
In order to assure that Federal agencies will have the benefit of the information and opinion that can be supplied by persons whom regulations will affect, the Administrative Procedure Act requires that the public must have opportunity to participate in rulemaking proceedings. The procedures to assure this opportunity...
- Recommendation number: 69-2
- Adopted on: October 22, 1969
- Tags: Congress, Enforcement, Judicial Review
The orders of most major independent regulatory agencies normally become enforceable automatically unless challenged in court. The statutory requirement that an order of the NLRB can be made effective only by affirmative action to obtain judicial confirmation of its terms, even when its validity is wholly uncontested, is contrary to efficient law enforcement. The...
- Recommendation number: 69-1
- Adopted on: October 22, 1969
- Tags: Congress, Judicial Review, Parties Defendant, Sovereign Immunity, United States as Defendant
The technical legal defense of sovereign immunity, which the Government may still use in some instances to block suits against it by its citizens regardless of the merit of their claims, has become in large measure unacceptable. Many years ago the United States by statute accepted legal responsibility for contractual liability and for various types of misconduct by its...
- Recommendation number: 68-8
- Adopted on: December 11, 1968
- Tags: Congress, Judicial Review
Judicial review of orders of the Interstate Commerce Commission in cases where at present a special three-judge District court is used under 28 U.S.C. 2325 should be by petition to review in the U.S. Courts of Appeals in the same general manner as review of agency orders under the Judicial Review Act of 1950, 28 U.S.C. (Supp. II, 1967) 2341-2352.
...- Recommendation number: 68-7
- Adopted on: December 11, 1968
- Tags: Congress, Judicial Review, Jurisdiction, Jurisdictional Amount
Title 28 of the United States Code should be amended to eliminate any requirement of a minimum jurisdictional amount before U.S. district courts may exercise original jurisdiction over any action in which the plaintiff alleges that he has been injured or threatened with injury by an officer or employee of the United States or any agency thereof, acting under color of Federal...