Agency dynamics: A timeline
| Five Pillars of the Administrative State |
|---|
|
| Agency control |
|
•Court cases |
| More pillars |
| •Judicial control • Executive control •Legislative control • Public control |
| Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
|
| Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker. |
Agency dynamics is one of five pillars key to understanding the main areas of debate about the nature and scope of the administrative state. Agency dynamics is a term used to refer to the structure and function of administrative agencies. While the majority of agencies are housed under the executive branch, others are established as independent federal agencies or are housed under the legislative or judicial branches. These structural variations impact agency oversight as well as agency interactions across branches. This pillar also involves understanding the nuts and bolts of agency functions, including rulemaking and adjudication proceedings.
This page features a timeline of selected events related to agency dynamics in the context of the administrative state.
Timeline
The timeline below identifies a selection of key events and court cases that have shaped agency dynamics in the context of the administrative state:
- 1887: Congress establishes first independent agency
- Congress established the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) as the nation's first independent federal agency—a type of agency that operates with some degree of autonomy from the executive branch. Independent federal agencies are generally headed by a commission or board made up of five to seven members. A seven-member commission headed the ICC, each of whom was appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate.
- 1932: U.S. Supreme Court upholds constitutionality of agency adjudication
- In Crowell v. Benson, the U.S. Supreme Court helped define the relationship between agencies and federal courts prior to the Administrative Procedure Act. The court upheld the constitutionality of agency adjudication.
- 1935: U.S. Supreme Court describes independent federal agencies as quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial entities
- In Humphrey's Executor v. United States, the court described independent federal agencies as quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial entities and affirmed that their multi-member commissions have protections against removal by the president.
- 1946: Administrative Procedure Act establishes uniform rulemaking and adjudication procedures
- Congress passed the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which established uniform procedures for federal agency rulemaking and adjudication. The APA stipulated both formal and informal procedures for rulemaking and adjudication.
- 1973: U.S. Supreme Court narrows applications of formal rulemaking
- In United States v. Florida East Coast Railway Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that agencies are only required to use formal rulemaking procedures when a statute calls for a hearing "on the record." The ruling contributed to the subsequent increase in agency use of informal procedures.
- 1978: U.S. Supreme Court limits additional procedural requirements for agencies
- In Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the U.S. Supreme Court held that courts cannot impose additional procedural requirements on agencies and cannot invalidate agency actions simply because they do not like the final result.
- 2000: U.S. Supreme Court prohibits use of guidance to make regulatory changes
- In Appalachian Power Company v. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the removal of a guidance document issued by the Environmental Protection Agency because the document instituted a regulatory change without following the required rulemaking procedures.
- 2020: U.S. Supreme Court limits removal protections for single heads of independent federal agencies
- In Seila Law v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the U.S. Supreme Court held that restrictions on the president's ability to remove single heads of independent federal agencies—as opposed to multi-member commissions—violated separation of powers principles by limiting executive control of such agencies.
See also
- Five pillars of the administrative state: Agency control
- United States Supreme Court
- Administrative state
Footnotes
