Judicial Review (Recommendations)

Tag cloud

Hide tags

With increasing frequency, rules of general applicability adopted by agencies informally pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 553 are being reviewed by the courts directly, before they are applied to particular persons in adjudicative proceedings. Such review may be by courts of appeals under statutes, mostly older statutes, providing generally for judicial review of orders of specific...

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...

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...

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...

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...

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.

...

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...

Recommendation 2012-6, “Reform of 28 U.S.C. Section 1500,” urges Congress to repeal Section 1500, which divests the U.S. Court of Federal Claims of jurisdiction when a plaintiff has claims against the government based on substantially the same operative facts pending in another court, and replace it with a provision that would create a presumption that in such circumstances...

In Recommendation 79-6, adopted in December 1979, the Conference criticized the then current version of the so-called Bumpers Amendment to Section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act. At that time, the Conference, expressing its belief that concern about the broad substantive reach of the rules of a host of agencies cannot be effectively...

Recommendation 2013-4, “The Administrative Record in Informal Rulemaking,” offers best practices for agencies in the compilation, preservation, and certification of records in informal rulemaking, and supports the judicial presumption of regularity for agency administrative records except in certain limited circumstances.

Pages