March 03, 2010
Reasonable Agencies
Posted by David Zaring

My article on Reasonable Agencies is all but out in the Virginia Law Review.  Here's the abstract:

This article argues that the complex doctrine of judicial review of administrative action—containing no less than six separate tests depending on the sort of agency action to be reviewed—both descriptively is and normatively should be simplified into a “reasonable agency” standard. Courts, following step two of the Chevron doctrine, have started to sneak a reasonableness standard into their review in lieu of making the difficult distinctions required by current doctrine. Scholars evaluating the difference among the various doctrinal tests have started to note the increasing similarity among the tests, at least as applied by the courts. Empirical research, to which this Article contributes an additional study, suggests that regardless of the standard of review, courts affirm agencies’ actions slightly more than two thirds of the time; the variance of the validation rates of agency action, regardless of the standard of review, is small. A reasonable agency standard would simplify and clarify administrative law, better describe what courts actually do when confronted with agency action, and better explain the judicial role in the administrative state. 

You can download it here, if you're so inclined.

Administrative Law | Bookmark

TrackBacks (1)

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Links to weblogs that reference Reasonable Agencies:

» Theory: Zaring on a single test for deference from Administrative Law Prof Blog ...
"On SSRN and soon to appear in the VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW at 96 VA. L. REV. 2317 (2010): "Reasonable Age ..." [more] (Tracked on March 9, 2010 @ 17:01)
Recent Comments
Popular Threads
Search The Glom
The Glom on Twitter
Archives by Topic
Archives by Date
January 2019
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    
Miscellaneous Links