Doctrines
Formalism v. Functionalism
Formalism is defined by the "formal" boundaries of the Constitution. The branches have whatever power they have been given by the Constitution- no more, no less.
Functionalism is kind of like adverse possession of powers. If a branch takes over a certain power unresisted for a long time, then it can be fairly assumed that the other branches and the people didn't have a problem with them doing so. Therefore, we look at how the branches have been "functioning" and what works practically, as opposed to merely what the Constitution specifically states.
INS v. Chadha
Legislative veto case. Violates bi-cameralism and presentment clause.
Who appoints?
Executive (Buckley v. Valeo) - not legislative. Sometimes with consent or approval of other bodies.
Three ways in which a decision is committed to agency by law.
These are not judicially reviewable.
a) No law to apply
b) A deeming clausec) Unreviewable language
APA 703 on Pre-Enforcement Review
Preserves ordinary review unless prior, adequate, and exclusive pre-enforcement review is provided by law.
What is an "agency action"?
Agency rule, order, license, sanction, or relief.
Massachusetts v. EPA
1) State seeking review = important
2) Only one petitioner need have standing
3) Agency refusal to make threshold findings for greenhouse gases at issue
4) Injury to coastlands from rising sea levels
5) Undisputed causal link (incremental steps can still be reviewed).
6) Therefore Massachusetts has standing
Who removes?
Executive exclusively (Morrison v. Olson)
When is an agency action arbitrary and capricious?
1) Failed to consider evidence
2) Misconstrues statute
3) Clear error of judgment
Finality Test
(1) Action must mark "consummation" of agency's decision-making process
(2) Action must be one by which rights or obligations or legal consequences will exist.
True or False; Agency actions can be general conduct of an agency.
False; Must be a discrete action.
Abbott Labs v. Gardner
(1) Did Congress intend to forbid pre-enforcement review?
(2) Else: Legal question w/ finality + hardship to the parties of withholding court consideration
Defines presidential powers (and list those powers)
Youngstown:
1) Strongest when acting according to Congress express or implied authority.
2) Twilight zone when Congress has not spoken.
3) Lowest ebb when in opposition to Congress.
The Legal Right Test
1) A litigant must allege injury to a legally protected interest (prevents 3rd party)
2) Presumptive element of plaintiff's right of action
3) Court looks at statutes for authorizing language "adversely affected"
(2) Phrases like "should", "suggest", and "encouraged" = too speculative
APA 701(a)(2)
Benzene case
Substantial evidence test described
Associational Standing Rules (3)
(1) Its members would otherwise have standing to sue in their own right
(2) Interests it seeks to protect are germane to org's purposes
(3) Neither claim nor relief requires participation of individual membersStanding rules per Blomquist (6)
(1) Injury in fact
(2) Traceable to conduct
(3) Such that remediable by judicial action
(4) Final agency action
(5) Administrative remedies exhausted
(6) Ripe and not moot
Availability of Judicial Review
(1) Jurisdiction
(2) Standing (ripeness, mootness, finality, exhaustion of available remedies)
(3) Preclusion of review statutorily (Veterans Administration)
(4) Committed to Agency discretion by law (Webster v. Doe: "deemed" CIA case)
Prosecutorial Discretion
1) Agency determinations not to prosecute violations are subject to high degrees of deference by the Court
2) Exceptions:
- Agency acts in clear violation of its governing statute or in excess of its statutory authority
- Use of mandatory language in enabling Act
Lujan
(1) Injury in fact which is concrete and particularized
(2) Causal connection between injury and conduct complained of
(3) Likely that injury will be redressed by a favorable decision
Agency commands are rules (true / false)
False
Standing per Summers v. Earth Island Institute
Requires concrete, particularized injury in fact. A procedural right by itself is insufficient to attain Article III standing.
Standing (3)
Injury, causation, redressability.