Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Administrative Action (administrative + action)
Selected AbstractsAt the Crossroads of Policymaking: Executive Politics, Administrative Action, and Judicial Deference by the DC Circuit Court of Appeals (1985,1996),LAW & POLICY, Issue 3-4 2004Kiki Caruson This study seeks to expand our understanding of judicial deference to administrative agencies within the context of one particularly important legal forum , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The DC circuit functions as a key venue for administrative law cases and the opinions of the court constitute a growing body of common law in the field of administrative law. We investigate the importance of several agency-centered and judge-centered variables in explaining judicial deference to administrative agencies in cases before the DC circuit court during a twelve-year period (1985,1996). We find that an integrated model of judicial deference, combining both legal and attitudinal factors, best explains judicial deference. Like judges on so many other courts, judges on the DC circuit are politically motivated, but their political activism is tempered by agency-centered factors such as the type of case before the court, and environmental factors such as the composition of the judicial panel reviewing the case and the behavior of the Supreme Court. [source] Coercion, Cooperation, and Control: Understanding the Policy Impact of Administrative Courts and the Ombudsman in the NetherlandsLAW & POLICY, Issue 1 2001Marc Hertogh This article examines the way in which administrative courts and the National Ombudsman in the Netherlands seek to control administrative action, and is aimed at developing a heuristic model that can also be useful in a wider context. Two styles of control will be introduced: "coercive" and "cooperative." An exploratory empirical study was conducted of two administrative agencies, investigating the implementation process of court and ombudsman decisions. This article argues that it is likely that the policy impact of the courts and the ombudsman is directly related to their style of control. More empirical research is needed to evaluate this hypothesis. [source] Judicial review and codificationLEGAL STUDIES, Issue 4 2000Timothy H Jones This article addresses the potential advantages and disadvantages of codifying the grounds of judicial review of administrative action. The four principal legal values associated with codification are described: certainty; clarity; democratic legitimacy; and rationality. The extent to which codification might further these values is considered in the light of two comparative models: the United States Administrative Procedure Act 1946 and the Australian Administrative Decisions (Judicial Review) Act 1977 (Cth). It is concluded that codification offers no solution to the practical and theoretical problems of judicial review. Codification places the content of the principles of judicial review in the hands of politicians. Australian legislation limiting the grounds of review available in migration cases shows the danger to the separation of powers inherent in codification. If it is thought desirable to foster the further development of the principles of judicial review, this can best be achieved by leaving the task to the judiciary. [source] An Administrative Manifesto for Survival in the Twenty-First CenturyPUBLIC ADMINISTRATION REVIEW, Issue 6 2009Hasan Danaee Fard Professor Ali Farazmand has written a manifesto for administrative action in an effort to improve public governance and administration capacity not only for today but also for tomorrow, which is highly volatile and uncertain. Farazmand's earlier works, especially his essay "Globalization and Public Administration" (PAR, November/December 1999), are familiar to many students and scholars in public administration around the world. [source] | ||||||||||