Administrative Hearings and Adjudication
Administrative Hearings and Adjudication
When agencies make decisions about individual rights, obligations, or privileges, they often do so through administrative adjudication — a quasi-judicial process that is less formal than a courtroom trial but still provides important procedural safeguards.
Types of Administrative Adjudication
Formal adjudication (Sections 556–557 of the APA) is required when a statute provides that a matter must be determined "on the record after opportunity for an agency hearing." Features include:
Informal adjudication — the vast majority of agency decisions (permit approvals, benefit determinations, enforcement actions) do not require formal hearings. The APA sets minimal requirements — agencies must provide notice and a brief statement of reasons.
Administrative Law Judges
ALJs are independent hearing officers within federal agencies. They enjoy protections designed to ensure impartiality:
Due Process Requirements
The Due Process Clause (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments) requires that individuals receive adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard before the government deprives them of a protected interest.
The Supreme Court's framework from Mathews v. Eldridge (1976) balances three factors:
1. The private interest affected
2. The risk of error under current procedures and the value of additional safeguards
3. The government's interest in efficiency and fiscal integrity
Common Types of Administrative Hearings
Agency Appeals
After an ALJ decision, parties may typically appeal to the agency head or an appellate body within the agency (e.g., the Social Security Appeals Council, the Board of Immigration Appeals). The agency head may review and reverse ALJ decisions.
Quiz: Administrative Hearings and Adjudication
Question 1 of 3What is an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ)?