Procedural rights: A timeline
From Ballotpedia
| Five Pillars of the Administrative State |
|---|
|
| Public control |
|
•Court cases |
| More pillars |
| •Agency control •Executive control • Judicial control •Legislative control |
| Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
|
| Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker. |
Procedural rights encompass debates about individual due process and standing before administrative agency adjudication and enforcement actions. Procedural rights also include citizen access agency rulemaking processes and decision making proceedings. Procedural rights and due process are core concepts within the Public Control pillar, one of the five pillars Ballotpedia uses to understand the main areas of debate about the nature and scope of the administrative state.
The appropriate degree of administrative due process and procedural rights protections in the context of the administrative state is a topic of debate and disputation within policy circles. The debate primarily concerns varying perspectives regarding constitutional and statutory due process and procedural rights requirements as well as the availability of due process and procedural rights protections during citizen interactions with the administrative state.
This page provides a timeline of procedural rights in the context of the administrative state.
Timeline
The timeline below identifies a selection of key events and court cases that have shaped procedural rights in the context of the administrative state:
- 1787: The U.S. Constitution provides for procedural rights and due process protections
- The U.S. Constitution's Bill of Rights stipulates procedural rights and due process protections for individuals in relation to the government. These include the right to due process when an individual is threatened with the loss of life, liberty, or property as well as protections against unreasonable search and seizure, self-incrimination, double jeopardy, and excessive fines, among other procedural safeguards.[1]
- 1868: Fourteenth Amendment incorporates due process rights against the states
- Congress adopted the Fourteenth Amendment as a means to extend the Fifth Amendment's federal due process protections to the states. The amendment prohibits states from depriving “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”[2][3][4]
- 1946: Administrative Procedure Act establishes procedural due process protections in administrative agency proceedings
- The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) established uniform procedures for federal agency rulemaking and adjudication. The APA stipulates a minimum floor of procedural protections during formal rulemaking and adjudication but does not extend those same protections to informal processes.
- 1970: U.S. Supreme Court broadens the definition of property in the context of due process
- In Goldberg v. Kelly, the U.S. Supreme Court broadened the concept of property within the “life, liberty, and property” framework of the Due Process Clause Court beyond real personal property to include government benefits. The court held that welfare recipients were entitled to a hearing before the state could terminate their benefits.[4][5]
- 1970: U.S. Supreme Court develops test to determine who receives standing
- In Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp, the U.S. Supreme Court developed the zone of interest test, which holds that a plaintiff seeking standing must allege an “injury in fact” and demonstrate that their interest is "arguably within the zone of interests to be protected or regulated by the statute or constitutional guarantee in question.”[6]
- 1976: U.S. Supreme Court develops balancing test to determine whether or not an individual has received administrative due process
- In Mathews v. Eldridge, the U.S. Supreme Court developed a three-part balancing test for lower courts to apply when determining whether or not an individual has received due process during administrative proceedings. The test requires courts to consider (1) the private interest at stake, (2) the effect on the private interest in the event of an erroneous determination as well as the value of any additional procedural safeguards, and (3) the government's interest, including the potential administrative burden of additional procedural safeguards.[7][8]
- 1976: U.S. Supreme Court factors administrative efficiency in due process calculus
- In Paul v. Davis, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the government’s interest in administrative efficiency has some weight in determining what process, if any, is due.[9]
- 1992: U.S. Supreme Court requires demonstrable injury to grant standing
- In Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, the U.S. Supreme Court applied the zone of interest test to formulate the contemporary criteria to satisfy standing. According to the Lujan criteria, a plaintiff must demonstrate an actual or threatened injury, must show that the injury can be traced to the challenged agency action, and must be able to obtain redress through a favorable decision by the court.[10][11][12]
- 1992: U.S. Supreme Court clarifies judicial review of final agency actions
- In Bennett v. Spear, the U.S. Supreme Court developed a two-part test to determine what qualifies as a final agency action for the purposes of judicial review: the final agency order must have exhausted all internal agency appeals and must “create rights or obligations from which legal consequences flow."[13]
See also
- Search Google News for this topic
- Procedural due process rights (administrative state)
- Ballotpedia's administrative state coverage
Footnotes
- ↑ National Archives, "The Bill of Rights: What Does it Say?" accessed March 24, 2021
- ↑ History.com, "14th Amendment," November 2, 2009
- ↑ Legal Information Institute, "Fourteenth Amendment," accessed March 24, 2021
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 Constitution Center, "The Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause," accessed March 24, 2021
- ↑ United States Supreme Court, Goldberg v. Kelly March 23, 1970
- ↑ Law Library—American Law and Legal Information, "Administrative Law and Procedure—Judicial Review Of Agency Actions," accessed October 22, 2020
- ↑ JUSTIA, "Mathews v. Eldridge," accessed September 13, 2018
- ↑ West's Encyclopedia of American Law, "Mathews v. Eldridge Test," accessed September 14, 2018
- ↑ JUSTIA, "Paul v. Davis," accessed March 25, 2021
- ↑ The Yale Law Journal, "Standing to Sue in Public Actions: Is it a Constitutional Requirement?" 1969
- ↑ JUSTIA, "Substantial Interest: Standing," accessed September 28, 2020
- ↑ Law Library—American Law and Legal Information, "Administrative Law and Procedure—Judicial Review Of Agency Actions," accessed October 22, 2020
- ↑ New York University Law Review, "Final Agency Action in the Administrative Procedure Act," November 2017
