Administrative Law

See also Administrative Agency ; Regulatory law / Administrative Law ; Legislative vs Common Law Courts

Videos

Common Sense with Rod Class

Audio

• The Impossibility of Policy
• The Infuriating Five of Administrative Law (Part One)
• The Infuriating Five of Administrative Law (Part Two)
• Stephen Breyer on Administrative Law and Textual Interpretation

Administrative = Executive

“It is the accepted rule, not only in state courts, but, of the federal courts as well, that when a judge is enforcing administrative law they are described as mere ‘extensions of the administrative agency for superior reviewing purposes’ as a ministerial clerk for an agency…” 30 Cal 596; 167 Cal 762

• Law Enforcement Officers enforce statutes
• Law Enforcement Officers are NOT Peace Officers
• Law Enforcement Officers are operating in their private capacity.

D.I.Y. Administrative Procedure 051017.pdf

How to hold "administrative criminals" to account?

Administrative law is the division of law that governs the activities of executive branch agencies of government. Administrative law concerns executive branch rule making (executive branch rules are generally referred to as "regulations"), adjudication, or the enforcement of laws. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law.

Administrative law deals with the decision-making of such administrative units of government that are part of the executive branch in such areas as international trade, manufacturing, the environment, taxation, broadcasting, immigration, and transport.

Administrative law expanded greatly during the twentieth century, as legislative bodies worldwide created more government agencies to regulate the social, economic and political spheres of human interaction.

Miranda v. Arizona Dictum: Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.

The Supreme Court knew that illegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal procedure.

Civil law countries often have specialized administrative courts that review these decisions.

In a summary offense prosecution will prosecute administratively. Administrative law doesn’t guarantee or uphold any of your rights.

Generally speaking, most countries that follow the principles of common law have developed procedures for judicial review that limit the reviewability of decisions made by administrative law bodies. Often these procedures are coupled with legislation or other common law doctrines that establish standards for proper rulemaking. Administrative law may also apply to review of decisions of so-called semi-public bodies, such as non-profit corporations, disciplinary boards, and other decision-making bodies that affect the legal rights of members of a particular group or entity.

While administrative decision-making bodies are often controlled by larger governmental units, their decisions could be reviewed by a court of general jurisdiction under some principle of judicial review based upon due process . Judicial review of administrative decisions is different from an administrative appeal. When sitting in review of a decision, the Court will only look at the method in which the decision was arrived at, whereas in an administrative appeal the correctness of the decision itself will be examined, usually by a higher body in the agency. This difference is vital in appreciating administrative law in common law countries.

The scope of judicial review may be limited to certain questions of fairness, or whether the administrative action is ultra vires. In terms of ultra vires actions in the broad sense, a reviewing court may set aside an administrative decision if it is unreasonable (under Canadian law, following the rejection of the "Patently Unreasonable" standard by the Supreme Court in Dunsmuir v New Brunswick), *Wednesbury* unreasonable (under British law), or arbitrary and capricious (under U.S. Administrative Procedure Act and New York State law). Administrative law, as laid down by the Supreme Court of India, has also recognized two more grounds of judicial review which were recognized but not applied by English Courts, namely legitimate expectation and proportionality.

The powers to review administrative decisions are usually established by statute, but were originally developed from the royal prerogative writs of English law, such as the writ of mandamus and the writ of certiorari. In certain common law jurisdictions, such as India or Pakistan, the power to pass such writs is a Constitutionally guaranteed power. This power is seen as fundamental to the power of judicial review and an aspect of the independent judiciary.

“All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/Creators in accordance with God’s laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process.” Rodrigues v. Ray Donavan (U.S. Department of Labor 769 F.2d 1344, 1348 (1985)