CJA 423 Discussion Notes

In my opinion, administrative law means that there is supervision over different kinds of agencies and people. I believe that administrative law makes sure that the agencies and the people are following the rules so there is no illegal activity.

There are three branches of federal government: legislative, executive, and judicial. The branch of government that I consider to be the most powerful is the judicial branch. Daniel Hall, the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy explains in detail what the judicial branch is responsible for. This branch is represented by various federal courts including the Supreme Court which is the highest court. In my opinion, I feel like this branch of government has a closer relationship to the regular citizens of the United States compared to the executive and legislative branch. "The judicial branch is responsible for administering justice, resolving disputes, and interpreting the law" (Hall, 2015, p.38). The judicial branch serves the important function of maintaining the balance of governmental powers along with the preservation of individual liberties. The courts in the judicial branch hear private lawsuits which can include individuals bringing suits against other individuals, criminal cases which is the government charging individuals, administrative cases such as the government taking noncriminal action against an individual and even cases where one government sues another government. Daniel Hall describes the judicial branch to be "an outlet for citizen-to-citizen disputes" (Hall, 2015, p.38).

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Issue: On November 22, 983 Appellee Roadway Express, Inc. (Roadway) discharged one of its drivers named Jerry Hufstetler alleging that he had disabled several lights on his assigned truck in order to obtain extra pay while waiting for repairs. Hufstetler filed a grievance stating he was discharged in retaliation for having previously complained of safety violations rather than an act of dishonesty. Hufstetler filed a complaint with the Department of Labor stating that his discharged violated section 405.

Rule: The issue presented in this appeal was whether the failure of section 405 to provide for an evidentiary hearing before temporary reinstatement deprives the employer of procedural due process under the Fifth Amendment. It is important to mention that this section found in the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982 is supposed to protect employees in the commercial motor transportation industry from being discharges in retaliation for refusing to operate a motor vehicle that doesn't comply with the state and federal regulations or for filing complaints alleging such noncompliance. When a statute occurs, there is an initial investigation of the employee's discharge.

Analysis: Determining the adequacy of predeprivation procedures requires consideration of the government's interest in imposing the temporary deprivation, the private interests of those affected by the deprivation. The District Court mentions how Roadway's interest in controlling the makeup of its workforce is substantial. The District Court failed to consider another private interest affected by the Secretary's decision: Hufstetler's interest in not being discharged for having complained about the allegedly unsafe condition of Roadway's trucks.

Conclusion: The employer is sufficiently protected by procedures that do not include an evidentiary hearing before the discharged employee is temporarily reinstated. As long as the reinstatement procedures establish a reliable "initial check against mistaken decisions" and complete and expeditious review is available. The preliminary reinstatement provision of section 405 balances the interests of the government, the employer, and the employer and this indicates that a prior evidentiary hearing is not otherwise constitutionally required.

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Daniel Hall is the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy and in the fourth chapter, there is a discussion of the procedural due process. Procedural Due Process is defined as "the minimum procedural steps a government must take before depriving a person of life, liberty, or property. Generally, due process includes the right to notice and a fair hearing" (Hall, 2015, p.70). The due process clause can be found in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Due process is explained to be a broad concept that is intended to protect people from arbitrary government conduct (Hall, 2015, p.70). The Due Process Clauses mandates that the state and federal governments treat all persons with a minimum amount of fairness where taking life, liberty, or property from them (Hall, 2015, p.70). The Procedural Due Process is concerned for the process by which the government pursues the objective of an agency's action. Their goal is to determine whether a person is entitled to a notice or hearing. Procedural Due Process is important to administrative law because it benefits the person in a protection sense so they can have an opportunity to be given a notice, a chance to have a hearing, and they are provided a decision that is made by a neutral decision maker. Procedural due process is important because it wants to incorporate fair procedures onto the people and it wants to prevent the wrongful deprivation of interests. The government has to make sure they are treating the people fairly.

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

On September 18, 2020. Associate Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg passed away. In my opinion, the selection process for a United States Supreme Court Justice is political in nature because they are responsible for hearing controversial cases from lower appeal courts. It is important to note that the Supreme Court receives approximately 8,000 petitions. The Supreme Court is the most powerful court in the United States. The selection process may be so political in nature because the Supreme Court Justices are the ones who has the ultimate authority of the laws and they have to ensure that those living in the United States that they have equal justice under the law. It is so political in nature because the Supreme Court Justices have to serve for life and they have significant power in laws that can affect peoples' lives. They have the power of judicial review which ensures that each branch of government knows the limits of its power. Daniel Hall is the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy and they mention that "All federal judges who are appointed under Article III have lifetime tenure of office and come to office through presidential nomination and Senate approval" (Hall, 2015, p.129). Article III of the Constitution provides that judicial power should be vested in one Supreme Court. I believe that there should be a deadline for the nomination and the Senate confirmation after the November 3rd election because selecting someone who will be responsible for serving a life sentence and have a significant say in law should be chosen wisely and not rushed.

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Daniel Hall is the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy and they mention the topic of rulemaking. In the case of quasi-legislative agency capacities, its behavior is commonly known as rulemaking. "Rulemaking is the process whereby agencies establish law to implement or perform a statutory duty" (Hall, 2015, p.144). An example of rulemaking and performing statutory duties is the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission where Congress enacted the REAL ID ACT and this was done with the support of the president. "This legislation prohibits individuals from using state driver's licenses that do not meet minimum security standards as identification to enter federal facilities, board federally regulated aircraft, enter a nuclear facility, and for other uses designated by the Secretary of Homeland Security" (Hall, 2015, p.144). There are different types of rules such as those that establish procedures, others create rights and obligations. It is important to note that rules have to be reasonable and it must relate to its enabling statute. A reviewing Court may invalidate the rule if it does not relate. With rulemaking, agencies are free to make rules and they do not need to conduct hearings. Rulemaking is directed at large groups or policy issues, concerns future conduct, their goal is to establish a rule to deal with future conduct, their decisions are based on facts and policy, and they set standards by which a person may be adjudged and sanctioned. Rulemaking serves a legislative function. Hall mentions that the growth of rulemaking can be noticed in the Code of Federal Regulations and the Federal Register.

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Daniel Hall is the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy and they mention the topic of investigations and collecting information in the seventh chapter "Agency Investigations and Information Collection". "Agencies depend on information when promulgating rules and conducting adjudications, and in all other aspects of their mandate" (Hall, 2015, p. 176). Collecting information and conducting investigations are important to administrative law agencies. One method that Hall discusses is requiring that individuals and businesses produce and maintain records as a way to provide administrative agencies with information. "An agency may require that these records be held subject to review by the agency, or the record producer may be required to provide the records to the agency" (Hall, 2015, p. 176). This is known to be called record keeping and reporting. The agency has the capability to ask the for the disclosure of information or that records be kept. The criteria for this are: the agency has jurisdiction over the subject and individual concerned, the requirement is reasonable and not overly burdensome, and finally the information is not privileged. An example of this would be the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has to require a regulated company to submit reports. The Federal Trade Commission collects information and is considered to be the nation's consumer protection agency. The FTC keeps the competition among businesses strong. They make sure that the information, records, etc. are provided in order to make sure that the companies are competing fairly and there is no lies about the company's services and products.

Administrative agencies have the power to conduct inspections and tests. Hall provides the example of the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration and how they inspect their businesses to in order to ensure that the worker safety rules are being obeyed. Local health inspectors also tend to inspect local restaurants to make sure that they are complying with the health codes. It is important that inspections and investigations are done to protect the health and welfare of the employees, customers, and the public. These inspections and investigations are conducted to have access to records and conditions. Administrative inspections and investigations try to discover administrative violations.

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Issue: The issue in this case is whether physicians' written reports of medical examinations they have made of a disability claimant may constitute "substantial evidence" supportive of a finding of non disability, within the statutory standard, when the claimant objects to the admissibility of those reports and when the only live testimony is presented on his side and is contrary to the reports.

Rule: There was a hearing. The claimant appeared at the first hearing with his attorney and with Dr. Morales. The attorney formally objected to the introduction of the several reports of Drs. Langston, Bailey, Mattson, and Lampert, and of the hospital records. Various grounds of objection were asserted, including hearsay, absence of an opportunity [to] cross-examine, absence of proof [that] the physicians were licensed to practice in Texas, [and] failure to demonstrate that the hospital records were proved under the Business Records Act. . . . Their objections were overruled and the reports and hospital records were introduced. The reports of Dr. Morales and of Dr. Munslow were then submitted by the claimant's counsel and admitted. (Hall, 2015, p. 220).

Analysis: At the two hearings oral testimony was submitted by claimant Perales, by Dr. Morales, by a former fellow employee of the claimant, by a vocational expert, and by Dr. Lewis A. Leavitt, a physician board-certified in physical medicine and rehabilitation. The claimant's propositions were accepted. Some of them were long established and that the procedural due process is applicable to the adjudicative administrative proceeding involving "the differing rules of fair play, which through the years, have become associated with differing types of hearings." There was still a question as to what the procedural due process requires with respect to examining physicians' reports in a Social Security disability claim hearing. There were a number of factors that underlies reliability and probative value. The first is that the identity of the five reporting physicians is significant. The second is that the vast workings of the Social Security system make for reliability and impartiality in the consultant reports. The third is one familiar with medical reports and the routine of the medical examination, general or specific, will recognize their elements of detail and value. The fourth is that the there was no inconsistency in the reports of the five specialists. The fifth is that the claimant did not take advantage of the opportunity. The sixth is that the courts have recognized the reliability and probative worth of written medical reports even in formal trials while acknowledging the hearsay character. The seventh is what the Chief Judge Brown described as "[t]he sheer magnitude of that administrative burden," and the resulting necessity for written reports without "elaboration through the traditional facility of oral testimony."

Conclusion: "We conclude that a written report by a licensed physician who has examined the claimant and who sets forth in his report his medical findings in his area of competence may be received as evidence in a disability hearing and, despite its hearsay character and an absence of cross-examination, and despite the presence of opposing direct medical testimony and testimony by the claimant himself, may constitute substantial evidence supportive of a finding by the hearing examiner adverse to the claimant, when the claimant has not exercised his right to subpoena the reporting physician and thereby provide himself with the opportunity [to] cross-examine the physician" (Hall, 2015, p. 220).

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

When dealing with a federal administrative agency, accountability is significant. With accountability, it makes sure that the federal administrative agency is complying with their identified purpose as identified in its enabling legislation. Congress can be involved in this process. Daniel Hall is the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy and they mention what Congress can and can't do. "Congress may require that constitutional claims be raised within a certain period of time, filed with a particular court, or raised in a certain manner" (Hall, 2015, p. 245). Congress does intend to allow judicial review of agency actions. By holding federal administrative agencies accountable, there can be facts found especially if the agency has to go to court. Hall mentions the substantial evidence standard and how reviewing courts may examine the facts found and conclusions reached by an agency. "A court may not, however, substitute its judgement for that of the agency under the substantial evidence test" (Hall, 2015, p. 281). This holds the agency accountable because the court reviews the agency's decision to make sure it can be supported. "The degree to which a court will intervene in an agency's decision depends on the function performed and whether the decision was one of law, fact, or discretion" (Hall, 2015, p. 299). Accountability is important as it relates to federal administrative agencies because it sets the expectations of the agency's goals. Accountability helps the agency make sure that what they are doing is moral and safe to themselves and the people they hope to help. Accountability is crucial for a federal administrative agency because it makes sure that the agency is following the appropriate regulations and the people working within this agency are not misusing their resources.

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Daniel Hall is the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy and in the tenth chapter titled "Accountability through Accessibility" they state that the public has rights to obtain information from the government and they have the right to observe its operations. The primary tool for obtaining information from the United States is the Freedom of Information Act and their whole purpose is to make information held by the government available to the public. The Freedom of Information Act is defined as a "federal disclosure statute requiring that information held by the government be made available for public review unless one of nine statutory exceptions applies" (Hall, 2015, p. 302). The FOIA has nine exemptions and they are exclusive and the exemption provisions are permissive. "An agency does not have to refuse to disclose information just because it falls within one of the FOIA exemptions; the agency has the discretion to decide whether to produce such records" (Hall, 2015, p. 309). The nine exemptions are: national security and foreign policy which are declared a secret by the president, agency personnel rule and practices, information exempted by statute, trade secrets/commercial/ financial information, interagency and intra agency memos, personnel and medical files, law enforcement records, regulation of financial institutions, and geological information.

However, there is the Privacy Act which is a law that prevents governmental disclosure of information in special circumstances and it protects individuals from disclosure of such disclosure. There are agencies who are required to publish specific information in the Federal Register. The two types of information that must be published in the Federal Register are notices of proposed rules and final rules. The public can gain access to information through the Inspection and Copying Requirement and it can be referred to as a reading room requirement because it provides a location for people to inspect and copy documents. Aside from providing a reading room, an agency may publish the information and provide copies for sale. "If an agency fails to make information available or fails to index documents, the FOIA provides that such order, opinion, statement of policy, or the like may not be used against a party, unless the party has been given actual and timely notice of the terms thereof" (Hall, 2015, p. 305).

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Daniel Hall is the author of Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy and in the eleventh chapter titled "Accountability through Liability" he states that the government has an overall responsibility to provide a multitude of public services involving health, welfare and safety to the public. Federal government employees should be able to be sued by citizens of this country if they sustained injuries due to the negligence of a federal employee. It is important to note that citizens can't sue the federal government unless the government allows it. "The Federal Employee Reform and Tort Compensation Act of 1988, also known as the Westfall Act, protected federal employees from liability for all acts taken in the course of their official duties" (Hall, 2015, p. 350). In American history, sovereign immunity was accepted. Sovereign immunity is defined as a "doctrine holding that the government is immune or free from liability" (Hall, 2015, p. 338). Hall mentions that the government must consent to be sued. This is due to the fact that both the federal and state governments are constitutionally sovereign. The citizen's right to sue to the government is derived from the legislature. "The liability of the government officials is discussed because plaintiffs often choose to sue a government employee rather than (or in addition to) the government itself" (Hall, 2015, p. 339). This usually occurs because the government may not be sued in some instances. Plus, the plaintiff may think that the officer is at fault and they should be held personally liable. "In 1946, the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) was enacted by Congress to give private parties the right to sue the United States in federal court for certain torts committed by persons acting on behalf of the United States" (Hall, 2015, p. 340). With this statute, the United States has partially waived immunity from suit for a number of specific torts. It is important for federal government employees to be held responsible when they were being negligent and it caused someone to get injured.

References
Hall, D. (2015). Administrative law: Bureaucracy in a democracy (6th ed.). Prentice Hall.

Being in CJA 423-41 Administrative Law, I learned a lot of valuable information. For example, I have never used and known about the IRAC method and I learned that it stood for Issue, Rule, Analysis, and Conclusion. This method helped me categorize certain aspects of a case in a way that helped me understand the specific case even more. At first, it was a little difficult but I got used to it as we used the IRAC method for another discussion post. Administrative law is important because it is a body of law that defines the powers, limitations, and procedures of administrative agencies. I learned more about procedural due process which is important to administrative law because it benefits the person in a protection sense so they can have an opportunity to be given a notice, a chance to have a hearing, and they are provided a decision that is made by a neutral decision maker. I learned that agencies have the authority to issue advisory opinions which offers the agency's interpretation of law or the assertion of the agency's policy. I learned that formal rule making is very time-consuming, expensive, and a method of rule making that agencies use. It was interesting to learn that when administrative inspections are conducted, they do not intend to discover evidence of criminal activities but the goal is to prove that there were administrative violations. This class taught me so much information and it is an interesting course.