Threshold Rules as Tools of Deference?: Circuit Judge Gatekeeping in Administrative Agency Cases*

By Kaheny, Erin B.; Rice, Kimberly J. | Justice System Journal, May 1, 2010 | Go to article overview

Threshold Rules as Tools of Deference?: Circuit Judge Gatekeeping in Administrative Agency Cases*


Kaheny, Erin B., Rice, Kimberly J., Justice System Journal


Given the importance of the courts in monitoring agency decisions, the extent of deference they offer to agencies is very important. Thus, existing research on administrative agencies and the courts has naturally focused on the extent to which courts defer to agency decisions on the merits of legal claims. Previous scholars, however, have not systematically assessed whether deference is also achieved via the use of threshold rules. In this article, we investigate the extent to which threshold rules are raised in administrative agency litigation and explore the nature of their use. Although our analysis reveals that procedural questions of access are considered in a nontrivial number of administrative agency cases heard by the U.S. Courts of Appeals, the results do not suggest that circuit judges consistently use such rules to curb the consideration of all claims raised in a given case. In addition, circuit judges are not more likely to deny access in challenges against executive as opposed to independent or other agency types. The results do suggest, however, that both ideological considerations and litigant status may play a role in influencing circuit-judge threshold votes in this context.

Through judicial review of agency action, the courts play a critical role in exercising control over administrative agencies. The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) of 1946 states that "any person suffering legal wrong because of agency action, or adversely affected or aggrieved by agency action within the meaning of a relevant statute, is entitled to judicial review thereof" (5 U.S.C. § 702). While the federal courts are statutorily charged with the oversight of agency action, Supreme Court precedent, in particular, the precedent set by Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC (1984),' suggests to lower courts that they should defer to agency expertise and, more important, agency interpretations of congressional legislation. This puts the federal courts in a precarious position where they are statutorily obligated to review administrative agency cases, but precedent directs the courts to defer to the agency in question.

While scholars have examined the extent to which the courts do, in fact, defer to agencies on the merits of legal challenges brought against them (see, e.g., Canon and Giles, 1972; Crowley, 1987; Humphries and Songer, 1999; Sheehan, 1990, 1992; Tanenhaus, 1960), courts can potentially defer to administrative agencies by way of other doctrinal and procedural rules of access (see, e.g., Mansfield, 1993:68-69; Smith, 1993:1570). In particular, judges can employ a number of threshold rules involving questions of standing, mootness, ripeness, exhaustion, jurisdiction, etc., to either narrow the claims considered in a given case or to refuse to consider any of the claims a litigant presents. Even if systematic deference is not the ultimate outcome of the use of such rules in the long tun, their employment can foreclose important opportunities for litigants to challenge agency decisions.

Take, for example, the alleged injury of the California Association of the Physically Handicapped (CAPH) in CAPH v. FCC (1985). In this case, CAPH appealed the FCCs decision to approve a stock transfer at the request of a media company via a "short form application" (pp. 824-25). Members of this group held the company had not done enough to make sure its programming was accessible nor had it, in CAPH's opinion, engaged in "reasonable efforts to hire the handicapped" (p. 825). However, a majority of a D.C. Circuit panel concluded the group lacked standing to challenge the FCCs decision. As the majority held, "The Association . . . cannot fairly trace its ongoing injury - either in origin or in endurance - to the transfer in question" (p. 825). Because of the nature of the requested stock transfer, the majority explained, there would be no effective change in who ran the media company regardless of the FCCs decision (pp. 826-27). The majority did, howevet, allude to the possibility that the group might have standing to sue in a "license renewal proceeding" (p.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Threshold Rules as Tools of Deference?: Circuit Judge Gatekeeping in Administrative Agency Cases*
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.