![[Home]](/wiki.gif)
Judicial Deference To Presumed Agency ExpertiseJudicial Deference To Presumed Agency Expertise
| |
| The Bush Survival Guide - 250 Ways to Make It Through The NExt Four Years Without Misunderestimating the Dangers Ahead, and Other Subliminable Stategeries |
|
Links:
| |
Judicial Deference to Presumed Agency Expertise. By training and experience, and out of respect for the Separation of Powers Doctrine that allocates discretion in the enforcement and implementation of our nation’s laws to administrative agencies (rather than to reviewing courts), most judges develop a highly deferential respect for agency decision-making. Particularly where the subject matter is complex or arcane, courts routinely decline to "second-guess" agency conclusions that are based on plausible grounds supported by contemporaneous documentation (as opposed to post hoc rationalization). This natural reluctance to delve into areas requiring specialized training and expertise is further compounded by the explosion of litigation during the past three decades that has overwhelmed the resources of most courts and sorely tested the patience of most jurists. For these reasons, motivating a distracted, impatient and overworked judge to dissect and independently assess agency decisions presents a daunting challenge. Foregoing legal counsel when preparing comments on proposed agency action frequently results in the omission of factual and legal arguments that would stimulate judicial skepticism of an agency’s presumed expertise and objectivity.
|
Interested in Google Terms Of Service For Getting A Google ID?