Judicial Review of Agency Actions

Judicial review allows courts to examine whether agency actions are lawful. It is the primary mechanism for holding administrative agencies accountable and ensuring they stay within the bounds of their statutory authority.

Availability of Judicial Review

The APA creates a presumption of reviewability — agency actions are subject to judicial review unless:

A statute precludes judicial review

The action is committed to agency discretion by law (a narrow exception)

To seek judicial review, a party must:

Have standing — suffered an injury in fact traceable to the agency action

Have exhausted administrative remedies — completed the agency's internal appeals process

Challenge a final agency action — not an interim or preliminary decision

File within any applicable statute of limitations

Standards of Review

Courts apply different standards depending on the type of agency action:

Arbitrary and capricious review (APA § 706(2)(A)) — the most common standard for reviewing informal agency actions. A court will set aside an agency action if:

The agency relied on factors Congress did not intend

The agency entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem

The agency's explanation runs counter to the evidence

The action is so implausible it cannot be attributed to expertise or a difference in view

Substantial evidence — applies to formal adjudication and formal rulemaking. The court asks whether a reasonable mind could accept the evidence as adequate to support the agency's conclusion.

De novo review — the court reviews the facts independently, giving no deference to the agency. Rare and limited to specific circumstances.

Chevron Deference and Its Evolution

Under Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984), courts traditionally deferred to an agency's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous statute it administered. The Supreme Court's decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) overruled Chevron, holding that courts must exercise independent judgment in interpreting statutes rather than deferring to agency interpretations. Courts may still consider an agency's interpretation as persuasive, but are not required to accept it.

Remedies

When a court finds an agency action unlawful, it may:

Vacate the action (set it aside)

Remand to the agency for further proceedings

Issue an injunction preventing the agency from enforcing the action

Grant declaratory relief clarifying the parties' rights

Practical Significance

Judicial review ensures agencies operate within their statutory authority, follow required procedures, and make reasoned decisions supported by the record. It maintains the rule of law in the administrative state.

Judicial Review of Agency Actions