Admin name cases Quiz

Rule	Case
An agency's choice to proceed by either rulemaking or ad hoc adjudication is within that agency's informed discretion informed discretion.
Congress commits an action to agency discretion when (1) the statute grants the agency discretion, and (2) the law doesn't establish a standard against which courts can assess the
The loss of a government entitlement has the same adverse impact on a person as when the government deprives that person of private property.
There is no judicial review for agency’s discretionary decision to refrain from enforcement proceedings.
An issue is ripe for judicial review when it is (1) fit for judicial review, and (2) will have a direct and immediate effect on the complainant.
Agency interpretations are only entitled to Chevron deference if the agency rule is made within congressionally delegated power to make rules with the force of law.
An agency's explanation of its rule must be sufficient to provide a reviewing court with a basis to determine whether the rule was arbitrary and capricious.
Reqs of due process requires balancing of (1) private interest affected; (2) government interest, incl $ and adminv burdens; (3) value of addtnl procedures and risk of error w/o th
Courts cannot impose additional rulemaking procedures on agencies beyond those required by the APA.
The scope of judicial review for mixed questions of law and fact is whether there is (1) warrant in the record to support the agency's factual conclusions, and (2) a reasonable bas
Presumption against formal rulemaking can only be overcome by express statutory language requiring a hearing on the record.
Any legislative act without both bicameralism and presentment is unconstitutional unless expressly outlined in the Constitution.

Rule	Case
FOIA does not itself give rise to a private right to prevent disclosure of documents.
Unlike principal officers, inferior officers tend to be (1) subject to removal by a higher executive branch official other than the President, (2) have limited duties; (3) have lim
Arbitrary and capricious review of a agency rulemaking involves a determination of whether a reasonable person would arrive at the same outcome as the agency.
Agency orders and rules which affect vast numbers of people may be adopted without affording every interested party a direct opportunity to be heard.
Due process requires notice and a hearing before a local tax board can impose taxes on specific landowners with 'specially benefited' property.
There is a general presumption of judicial review for all agency actions that can only be overcome by congressional intent that is 'clear and convincing.' (Now 'fairly discernible
The scope of review under the substantial evidence standard is whether the record (considered on the whole) presents substantial evidence to support an agency's finding of fact--i.
Ex parte communications after an NPRM, between agency employees and an interested party, should be entered into the rulemaking record out of an abundance of caution.
Restrictions on the President's removal powers cannot interfere with his ability to execute his executive powers or 'Take Care' duties.
In determining whether an agency's rulemaking was arbitrary and capricious, courts should only consider the agency's contemporaneous (as opposed to post hoc) explanation.
Courts must defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute.
When reviewing an agency's informal adjudication, courts should determine (1) the scope of the official's authority, (2) whether the official abused that authority, and (3) whether

Javascript is not currently enabled on your browser.
If you do have Javascript enabled:
This site uses javascript to make the magic happen.
Please turn on javascript and reload this page, or use a more current browser (like Firefox)