constitutional law i the administrative state nov. 1, 2004
DESCRIPTION
Fall, 2004Con Law I - Manheim3 Example of Admin AgencyTRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Constitutional Law I
The Administrative State
Nov. 1, 2004
![Page 2: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 2
Administrative AgenciesUtility Administrative State arose by necessity
breadth of federal gov’t and regulations develop institutional expertise
Const’l Framework Admin. agencies are part of executive branch
subject to Jackson 3-zone structural approach Exercising delegated power
non-delegation doctrine (dual fed’ism) greatly restricted
if acting outside delegation, then zone-2 or zone-3
![Page 3: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 3
Example of Admin Agency
![Page 4: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 4
![Page 5: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 5
![Page 6: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 6
Functions of Admin Agencies
Executive functions apply/administer/enforce federal law
Quasi-Judicial Functions adjudicate disputes involv-
ing agency functions agency courts hear “public
rights” cases
Quasi-Legislative Functions promulgate rules,
regulations, & (micro) policy congress can override by
statute
![Page 7: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 7
Why Agencies have such power
Complete separation of power not feasible Some degree of law-making is inevitable in
Executing laws Deciding cases
Some degree of adjudicating also inevitable in Administering laws
As result, most agencies are in Exec Branch basic functions are executive
enforce congressional and Presidential policy
Because of their integrated functions agencies need to be in the branch
with the most flexible SoP oversight
![Page 8: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 8
Non-Executive AgenciesArt. I: Congressional agencies and offices Example: CBO, Library of Congress, GAO cannot exercise these functions
executive judicial legislative (surprise) see INS v. Chadha
can assist congress w/ research, advice, etc.
Art. III: Judicial agencies and offices Ex: judicial council, magistrates no Art. I, II, or III functions,
can assist courts (recommendations)
Ancillary lawmaking functions
![Page 9: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 9
Non-Delegation DoctrineSchechter Poultry v. United States (1935) NIRA authorizes President
to implement “Code of Fair Competition” as proposed by (private) Industry group
Delegation of legislative power Invalid if unfettered discretion Valid if limited (guided) discretion
NIRA imposes few policy standardsPanama Refining v. Ryan (1935) Cong. authorizes President to prohibit “hot oil”
Bare Presidential policy; not “executing” any law Policy not specifically set by congress
“Intelligible principle” principle
![Page 10: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 10
Whitman v. Am Trucking Assn (2001)
Does EPA exercise legislative or quasi-leg. power? Clean Air Act requires EPA to promulgate Air Qual Stds
Standard must protect public health based on published air quality criteria and latest scientific knowledge
Has congress set “intelligible principle” for EPA? Intelligible principle test does not foreclose agency from
creating policy. Congress need not create formula, with agency
discretion limited to plugging in numbers. “A certain degree of discretion, and thus of lawmaking,
inheres in most executive or judicial action” can’t delegate pure legislative power
but discretion as part of admin function ok
![Page 11: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 11
Mistretta v. United States (1989)
Penal remedies are set by congress Traditionally, congress delegates discretion to
judiciary to sentence within statutory rangeUS Sentencing Commission Delegated authority to create binding
guidelines Court must state reason for any departure
Is delegation to Comm’n excessive? Degree of generality: Congress needs only to
state an "intelligible principle" to guide agency's discretion Has it here? Or merely stated "purposes""purposes" and
asked the Commission to develop its own policies?
Does Mistretta overrule Schechter and Panama?
![Page 12: Constitutional Law I The Administrative State Nov. 1, 2004](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062600/5a4d1b847f8b9ab0599bbfbb/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Fall, 2004 Con Law I - Manheim 12
Mistretta v. United States (1989)
In which branch of gov't is Com'n located? Executive branch?
President both appoints and removes members Gen'l rule: an agency is located in the branch with
the power of removal What problems if Com'n is "located" in exec branch?
Scalia problem: rule-making function is not "incident" to any executive function
but is it incident to judicial function? Judicial independence: can Art. III judges be assigned
to non-Art. III agency? Sentencing Commission is a hybrid
Located outside of all 3 branches Compare "Independent" agencies