Judicial Review Of American Administrative Rules

Judicial Review of Administrative Rules in the United States is a study of how American courts review administrative rules.Scheffran v.Natural Resources Board in1984 plays a very important role in the field of administrative law in the United States.The basic spirit of the case is to limit the scope of judicial review,transfer the interpretation power of the law implemented by the administrative organ from the court to the administrative organ,and establish a new principle of power distribution between the administrative organ and the court.In addition,the Scheffran case became a landmark case of "judicial deference".The case involves the core problem of how to understand judicial review under the separation of powers system.However,this case involves far more than judicial function,and more is related to the relationship between legislation,judicial and administration.Although the case continues to be debated,the Supreme Court has yet to overturn it.The Supreme Court hold Kisor v.Wilkie in 2019,considered another landmark case of "judicial deference," which greatly limited judicial deference to administrative rules made by executive agencies.Based on the basic standpoint of legal hermeneutics,this paper adopts the argumentation idea of "description of solid law--analysis of problems--suggestion".Starting from the explanation of relevant concepts,based on the analysis of typical cases of American administrative rules in judicial practice,this paper studies the status quo and problems of solid law in judicial review of American administrative rules.At the end of this paper,from the perspective of comparative study of American administrative rules,the problems in judicial review of administrative normative documents in China are analyzed and some suggestions for reference are put forward.In the judicial review framework of the United States,there is no administrative court similar to the civil law system,but based on the principle of equality to resolve administrative disputes between citizens and the government.Generally speaking,the scope of judicial review consists of two elements,one is dimension and the other is intensity.Traditionally,it has been up to Congress to determine the scope of review and the Supreme Court to determine the intensity of review in a given situation.The intensity of judicial review is influenced by many factors and variables,whether from the model of a country as a whole or from a specific level.The intensity of censorship is always very flexible and unstable,which is difficult to grasp.The judicial review of administrative rule is a unique system of "judicial deference",such a review of theory are basically has the following several reasons,first,there has been "facts-law" in the American judicial review review of tradition,to respect the fact that administrative organs,to review on the legal issues.In essence,judicial review of administrative acts of administrative organs is a kind of appellate review mode.The court believes that administrative organs have more advantages in ascertaining facts by directly contacting witnesses,holding hearings,collecting information and making records.Second,courts recognize their own limitations,and when there are multiple interpretations of a legal interpretation,they voluntarily give the executive agency the power to choose the best solution.Third,as the "prohibition of delegation doctrine" has long been frozen by the Supreme Court,the complexity of the reality that the government has to deal with has increased,and Congress has gradually delegated more legislative power to the executive branch.After Roosevelt’s New Deal,the rise of independent regulatory commissions promoted the expansion of administrative law in the United States.At the same time,it also gave birth to a powerful federal administrative system.These commissions were set up specifically for specific matters,and these administrative organs were more professional.Fourthly,with the reform of the Federal Administrative Procedure Act,the Supreme Court of the United States held that the more formal the administrative rule making procedure is,the more extensive the subjects are involved and the more sufficient the relevant factors are considered,the court should respect the rules made by the administrative organ.In the 21 st century,this model of judicial deference has been criticized as giving too much power to the executive branch.Over time,a movement has begun to abolish or at least severely limit such deference,demanding rigorous scrutiny from the courts.After Kisor v.Wilkie,however,the Supreme Court temporarily upheld the ORR rule.But many judges and scholars predict that courts will gradually show less respect for agency rules-making and more rigorous judicial review of administrative rules.At present,whether the court carries out strict review mainly depends on(1)the intention of congress;(2)Professionalism of administrative organs;(3)The independence of administrative organs;(4)Comprehensive consideration of factors such as error cost.By comparing the modes of judicial review of administrative rules in China and the United States,we can find that the legal system,constitutional basis,concept of legal interpretation,and the degree of understanding of administrative rules themselves play a decisive role in the judicial review mode of a country.The differences between China and the United States in the judicial review mode of administrative rules are reflected in the different ideas and logic on the institutional arrangement of the contents and standards of judicial review of administrative rules under different review intensity modes.In terms of our country,in 2014,the revised "administrative procedural law" from the system level to establish the judicial review of administrative normative documents,2018 "administrative procedural law" judicial interpretation to refine to review along with all the rights,after the examination way,the strength of censorship,legitimacy and other issues still puzzled academic field and practice field.Through the analysis of the content,standard and intensity of judicial review of American administrative rules,we find some advantages and defects in judicial review of American administrative rules,we can draw lessons from the successful areas,and we should avoid the deficiencies.A country’s legal system must adapt to its political foundation and economic system.China has entered a new period of building the socialist rule of law with Chinese characteristics,which is an important period for building a strong socialist country.General Secretary Xi Jinping stressed that proceeding from China’s actual conditions does not mean pursuing the rule of law behind closed doors.As a common achievement of human civilization,law should be studied in all systems and experiences conducive to the development of the rule of law in China.In this regard,this paper puts forward four countermeasures on the basis of absorption and reference.First,to the authorization model,straighten out the relationship between executive power and judicial power.Second,the establishment of differentiated review standards of administrative rules,different types of administrative normative documents for differentiated review;Thirdly,the independent review of administrative normative documents should be established timely to solve disputes from the source.Fourth,form effective governance of administrative normative documents through cooperation...