Become part of the movement for unbiased, accessible election information. Donate today.
Procedural rights: States that provide for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings (2020)
| This survey is part of a series of 50-state surveys examining the five pillars key to understanding the administrative state |
| Administrative State |
|---|
|
| Five Pillars of the Administrative State |
| •Agency control • Executive control • Judicial 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. |
Disclaimer:
The research presented on this page was completed in 2020. It has not been regularly updated since its completion. This page is likely outdated and may be incomplete.
This Ballotpedia article is in need of updates. Please email us if you would like to suggest a revision. If you would like to help our coverage grow, consider donating to Ballotpedia.
This page contains information from a Ballotpedia survey about administrative due process. Ballotpedia reviewed the 50 state constitutions and administrative procedures acts (APAs) to determine which states provided for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings as of June 2020.
Because state administrative agencies are unlike traditional state courts, the same rules do not always apply. The absence of jury participation is a way agency adjudication differs from the traditional judicial process that state courts follow.
Understanding the procedural protections available during adjudication provides insight into procedural rights of citizens at the state level. Procedural rights is one of the five pillars key to understanding the main areas of debate about the nature and scope of the administrative state.
According to the Ballotpedia survey, no state constitutions or APAs provided for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings as of June 2020. Thus, hearing officers or other agency officials presided over and decided the outcome of adjudications instead of people from the community.
This page features the following sections:
- Background and methodology
- Summary of key findings
- Table showing states that provided for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings
Background and methodology
Background
For this survey, Ballotpedia examined whether states provided for juries to participate during agency adjudication. Adjudication proceedings include agency determinations outside of the rulemaking process that aim to resolve disputes between either agencies and private parties or between two private parties. The adjudication process results in the issuance of an adjudicative order, which serves to settle the dispute and, in some cases, may set agency policy.
As administrative agencies are not part of the judicial branch of the state government but rather the executive, they often have due process standards that differ from those followed in the traditional judicial branch courts.
Administrative Procedure Acts (APAs), which govern the procedures state administrative agencies must follow to issue regulations and adjudicate disputes, vary among the 50 states, but many offer fewer procedural protections for those accused of wrongdoing than a defendant would have in a courtroom.
Ballotpedia learned that no state constitutions or APAs provided for juries to participate in the adjudication process.
Methodology
Ballotpedia examined all 50 state constitutions and Administrative Procedure Acts (APAs) to see whether states provided for juries to participate in the adjudication process. Ballotpedia reviewed each provision involving agency orders, penalties, hearings, or appeals to see whether juries could be involved at any point.
Other state laws might have provided for jury participation in adjudication hearings, but those were beyond the scope of this survey.
Summary of findings
Ballotpedia's survey of state constitutions and APAs produced the following key takeaway (as of June 2020):
- No states provided for jury participation during agency adjudication hearings
Results: States that provided for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings
The table below includes each state in alphabetical order and indicates those with specific provisions in their constitutions or APAs providing for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings.
means that the state provided for juries to participate in adjudication hearings
means that the state did not provide for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings
Other state laws that might have provided for jury participation in the agency adjudication process were beyond the scope of this survey.
| State | Constitution or APA provisions for juries to participate in agency adjudication hearings | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 
| ||
| Alaska |
| ||
| Arizona |
| ||
| Arkansas |
| ||
| California |
| ||
| Colorado |
| ||
| Connecticut |
| ||
| Delaware |
| ||
| Florida |
| ||
| Georgia |
| ||
| Hawaii |
| ||
| Idaho |
| ||
| Illinois |
| ||
| Indiana |
| ||
| Iowa |
| ||
| Kansas |
| ||
| Kentucky |
| ||
| Louisiana |
| ||
| Maine |
| ||
| Maryland |
| ||
| Massachusetts |
| ||
| Michigan |
| ||
| Minnesota |
| ||
| Mississippi |
| ||
| Missouri |
| ||
| Montana |
| ||
| Nebraska |
| ||
| Nevada |
| ||
| New Hampshire |
| ||
| New Jersey |
| ||
| New Mexico |
| ||
| New York |
| ||
| North Carolina |
| ||
| North Dakota |
| ||
| Ohio |
| ||
| Oklahoma |
| ||
| Oregon |
| ||
| Pennsylvania |
| ||
| Rhode Island |
| ||
| South Carolina |
| ||
| South Dakota |
| ||
| Tennessee | *
| ||
| Texas |
| ||
| Utah |
| ||
| Vermont |
| ||
| Virginia |
| ||
| Washington |
| ||
| West Virginia |
| ||
| Wisconsin |
| ||
| Wyoming |
| ||
| Notes: * - The Tennessee Constitution requires juries to assess fines larger than $50, but the Tennessee Supreme Court ruled in 2009 that the limitation applies only to the judicial branch.[1] | |||
See also
Footnotes
