Administrative Law Flashcards

Under APA §706, the 'arbitrary and capricious' standard requires a reviewing court to:

Answer: Ensure the agency considered relevant factors and articulated a rational connection between facts and the decision

Arbitrary and capricious review requires agencies to examine relevant factors and explain their reasoning, but courts do not substitute their own policy judgment for the agency's.

Following the Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, courts reviewing agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes must:

Answer: Exercise independent judicial judgment to determine the best reading of the statute

Loper Bright overruled Chevron v. NRDC, holding that courts must independently determine the best reading of statutes rather than deferring to agencies simply because a statute is ambiguous.

The 'substantial evidence' standard for reviewing formal agency adjudications under the APA requires evidence that is:

Answer: Such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion

The substantial evidence test, articulated in Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, asks whether the record contains evidence a reasonable mind could accept as adequate to support the agency's conclusion.

Under Oregon's APA, when a court reviews an agency's legal conclusions in a contested case, the court should:

Answer: Exercise de novo review but may give weight to the agency's specialized expertise

Under ORS 183.482(8), Oregon courts review questions of law de novo but may accord appropriate weight to the agency's expertise in its specialized regulatory field.

The 'hard look' doctrine in administrative law, developed in Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Ass'n v. State Farm, primarily requires:

Answer: Agencies to genuinely consider relevant factors and alternatives before making a regulatory decision

The hard look doctrine requires agencies to take a genuine, thorough look at the relevant factors, reasonable alternatives, and the evidence when making regulatory decisions.

For an agency action to be considered 'ripe' for judicial review, courts require:

Answer: That the action be final and that the legal issues be fit for review and withholding review would cause hardship

Ripeness requires both fitness—the legal issues are developed enough for review—and hardship—the parties would suffer real harm if review were delayed.

Under the APA, agency action is 'final' and therefore reviewable when the action:

Answer: Consummates the agency's decision-making process and determines rights or obligations

Under Bennett v. Spear, agency action is final when it marks the consummation of the decision-making process and has direct legal consequences on rights or obligations.