Document Type
Response or Comment
Publication Title
Chicago -Kent Law Review
Publication Date
1997
ISSN
0009-3599
Page Number
1359
Keywords
reviewability, agency decisions, Administrative Procedure Act, judicial review
Disciplines
Administrative Law | Law
Abstract
In this Comment, I shall explore the issue of reviewability, as discussed by Krent, in the context of one flexible approach to regulation-- express agency waiver of regulations. Part I of this Comment addresses the increased need for flexible solutions in the administrative context, such as waiver of rules, and provides some examples. Part II argues that, especially in the context of flexible regulatory approaches, Heckler v. Chaney, a key case for determining whether courts will review agency decisions, should not be given a reading that precludes review of agency inaction. It should be read to value consistency with program purposes and across similar adjudicative cases, as well as consistency with the letter of published regulations. In Part III, I suggest that Krent's process proposal may provide for too little oversight of agency decisionmaking in the waiver context. In considering appeals of agency flexibility decisions, such as administrative waiver of regulation, courts should generally err in favor of, rather than against, reviewability; in the waiver context, the third-party reliance approach examined by Krent provides a more legitimate approach than the process approach for determining the appropriateness of review.
Recommended Citation
Jim Rossi,
Waivers, Flexibility, and Reviewability, 72 Chicago -Kent Law Review. 1359
(1997)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/577