Logo image
Agency oversight as "whac-a-mole": the challenge of restricting agency use of nonlegislative rules
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Agency oversight as "whac-a-mole": the challenge of restricting agency use of nonlegislative rules

Stuart Shapiro
Harvard journal of law & public policy, Vol.37(2), pp.523-552
Spring 2014
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7282/00000093

Abstract

Regulatory agencies Enforcement Judicial reviews Methods Accountability Regulation
When agencies want to compel private entities to act, they face a complex array of choices. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) gives agencies a series of options for pursuing their preferred policy. At one extreme is the possibility of formal rulemaking. Formal rulemaking, requiring a quasi-judicial proceeding, is rarely used by agencies. It is extremely burdensome for them and, after a period of initial experimentation with the approach, agencies have largely abandoned it altogether. Legislation inevitably gives agencies discretion to make policy choices. Over the past half-century, informal rulemaking has become the preeminent way that agencies make these choices. As a result, there have been increasing attempts to proceduralize the informal rulemaking process so as to give it a greater sense of democratic accountability. It is important to note that the extent to which agencies will be dissuaded from using nonlegislative rules will vary with the burden imposed by the procedural reform addressing these documents.
pdf
37_2_523_Shapiro-1508.35 kBDownloadView
Version of Record (VoR) Open Access
url
https://www.harvard-jlpp.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2014/05/37_2_523_Shapiro-1.pdfView
Version of Record (VoR) Harvard journal of law & public policy
url
Report an accessibility issueView
Please complete a content remediation request to report an accessibility issue with a library electronic resource, website, or service.

Metrics

175 File downloads
38 Record Views

Details

Logo image