Home

Climate Change Project

Table of Contents

Courses

Search


Administrative Law, Fall 2003

Adlaw Questions and Answers

My email is richards@lsu.edu

I will post any important questions and answers that come up here.

----------------------------------- 7 Dec 2003

> I am having trouble with the delegation cases. Would you
> mind clarifying the positions of AFL-CIO, Whitman (is this in
> the book?), and Legal Services Corp?

AFL-CIO is not a delegation case, it is a case about whether the agency exceeded its authority. Whitman, which is a supplement case in the study guide, turned out to not be a delegation case because the court decided not to worry about delegation questions any more. Legal Services was not a delegation issue, but a primary constitutionality issue - congress wanted to impose what the court thought was an unconstitutional limitation on the legal services agency. The issue was the legality of the restriction, not whether it could be delegated. Bottom-line - delegation issues are dead.

----------------------------------- 7 Dec 2003

> My notes are unclear about In the matter of Ciba-Geigy Corp.
> Could you claify the significance of it for me?

This case involved a statute that required the agency to consider specific factors in making its decision. The agency record did not address specific factors required by the statute so the court found that the record did not support the decision and remanded it. The key is that if the statute requires specific fact finding, that must be part of the agency record.

----------------------------------- 7 Dec 2003

> afl-cio v. api. I cannot find this case, it is listed on the
> greatest hits caselist, did you mean afl-cio v. connally?

Industrial Union Department, AFL-CIO v. American Petroleum Institute - the Benzene Case. Did not mean to be so cryptic.

----------------------------------- 5 Dec 2003

> How important is it to know all the items in the lists from the questions (ex. ABA 8 reasons agency action will be set aside, FOIA exceptions, and Baker v. Carr Factors from Chadha)? Do we need to know every item in the list, or just a general idea of what the factors together are looking for?

It depends. The ABA 8 reasons are just a review of the different attacks on an agency action, and, if you look closely at them, you can see that there is a lot of overlap. In that case you need to know the general principle, not the arbitrary 8 reasons. Same with Baker v. Carr - you just need to understand the principle of a political question. FOIA is different - while most of the class did not appear to read the FOIA materials, it is a very important topic. The FOIA factors are the core of FOIA - if you do not know them, you do not know the heart of FOIA.

> In the questions, there are some cases directly mentioned that are not in the greatest hits. For those cases do we need to just know the rule or will they be asked about by name on the exam?

You just need to know the rule.

>When is the latest we can send questions to you?

Monday morning will be getting pretty tight.

----------------------------------- 5 Dec 2003

> After reviewing your previous exams in Ad Law I have noticed there is a different format used in last years exam as compared to those in the past. Those in the past seem to have had a more straight forward approach. Now that you have written the exam, is there any way you can tell us which exam format this years exam is closest to?

Last year was a small class, the previous years were large classes. This year is the largest class I had in a while - clearly that will bias me toward more questions with shorter answers.

----------------------------------- 4 Dec 2003

A quote from Justice Scalia on administative law:

When I was invited to speak here at Duke Law School, I had originally intended to give a talk that reflected upon the relationship among the Bork confirmation hearings, the proposed federal salary increase, capital punishment, Roe v. Wade, and Law and Astrology. I was advised, however, that the subject of this lecture series is administrative law, and so have had to limit myself accordingly. Administrative law is not for sissies--so you should have lean back, clutch the sides of your chairs, and steel yourselves for a pretty dull lecture. There will be a quiz afterwards.

----------------------------------- 4 Dec 2003

> I am having a hard time putting Overton Park v Volpe into context. I looked at the whole case and it seem to spend a lot of time on what doesn't apply and little on what does. Could you help me figure out what to take away from this case?

The key to this case is that it set out the standards for reviewing the record for an informal adjudication on appeal. The secretary did not justify his decision to build the road through the park in the administrative record, but tried to supplement the record in the briefs filed during the judicial review of the decision. The Court rejected this attempt to supplement the record and held that the court must only review what was before the secretary when he made the decision. While the standard for review was arbitrary and capricious, it must be supported by a record explaining the decision. Without a record, the decision was arbitrary and capricious.

----------------------------------- 4 Dec 2003

> is the exam open or closed book?

Closed book

----------------------------------- 4 Dec 2003

> What is the case questioning the role of bankruptcy judges and why was the court concerned with their powers?

It is in the notes after page 428. You do not need to know the case name. We talked about it because it dealt with whether congress could create judges that did not meet Art III standards. The court said that bankruptcy judges had too much power for non-Art III judges, but Congress has not done anything about it and the courts have not revisited the issue.

----------------------------------- 3 Dec 2003

> I can't find an answer for when groups can sue for 3rd parties not in their groups. Can you tell me when we covered that. I tend to think they can't sue for people not in their group.

I am not sure we covered this. It is a technical question about what makes a person a member of the group. The courts use an "indicia of membership" test that allows groups without members in the traditional sense, but with people who act as members, to bring claims. This requirement can also be changed by statute because the legislature can allow third-party standing - an example are next friend laws to bring claims on behalf of legal incompetents. The association can also bring a claim in the name of any person, member or not, if the person meets standing requirements. The ACLU does this all the time. The three part test only applies when the claim is in the association's name. If you want more information, see: United Food and Commercial Workers Union Local 751 v. Brown Group, Inc., 517 U.S. 544 (1996)

-----------------------------------

> What is the full case name of Jacobson and St. Marks?

They are on the site, but that is enough for me. I just want to be able to recognize the case, not get the full details.

-----------------------------

> I was wondering if the cases on the "Greatest hits list" were
> the only ones covered on the final or whether those are the
> cases that may be in the "name that case" section of the exam.

They are the case names you need to know. While we discussed principles from many cases in the slides, you only need to know the principles, not the specific case names for these cases.

The Climate Change and Public Health Law Site
The Best on the WWW Since 1995!
Copyright as to non-public domain materials
See DR-KATE.COM for home hurricane and disaster preparation
See WWW.EPR-ART.COM for photography of southern Louisiana and Hurricane Katrina
Professor Edward P. Richards, III, JD, MPH - Webmaster

Provide Website Feedback - https://www.lsu.edu/feedback
Accessibility Statement - https://www.lsu.edu/accessibility