JURI 625 Quiz Enforcement, Licensing, Ratemaking, Gathering Information
Agency enforcement targets sometimes argue against enforcement on the ground that their competitors are committing the same violation that they have been found guilty of, and it is unfair for the agency to single them out for enforcement without bringing enforcement actions against their competitors also. The standard that is applied is highly deferential and challengers rarely prevail. The standard for evaluating such discriminatory enforcement claims is known as:
Due process requires this before an agency can finally impose a penalty:
This type of preemption exists when federal law is inconsistent with state law but does not specifically address preemption
There are two methods agencies use most often to gather information. These two methods are inspections and
When there are competing applications for a new frequency, this decision holds that the FCC may not grant one application without holding a hearing on both, because the Court views the grant of one as effectively denying the other.
This type of preemption arises from a federal statute that specifies the preemptive effect of federal law.
This doctrine requires that certain claims be heard in an agency either before, or instead of, an action in a court.
Practitioners of many occupations are regulated by state authorities through licensing and disciplinary processes. Subjects of disciplinary proceedings involving professional licenses are entitled to due process, but it does not violate due process for legislative prosecutorial, and adjudicatory functions to be combined in a single agency. Which one of the following is NOT an occupation regulated through licensing and disciplinary processes?
Citizens’ suit provisions in many regulatory statutes allow injunctive actions against violators (including the government) and mandamus-like actions against the government when the claims involve the government as regulator.
Which one of the following is the standard for awarding broadcast licenses which gives the FCC a great deal of discretion in licensing proceedings?
Pervasively regulated businesses, such as establishments serving alcohol and automobile junkyards, may be inspected without warrants as long as the regulatory scheme is supported by a substantial government interest, warrantless searches are necessary to advance the government interest, and the standards governing inspections under the regulatory scheme provide an adequate substitute for the warrant procedure.
If members of one segment of a profession dominate an occupational licensing agency, and they take disciplinary action to eliminate competition from another segment of the profession, the bias due to self- interest in the outcome of the disciplinary action may violate:
Agencies have a great deal of discretion over whether to regulate and over the choice of targets for enforcement action. Ambiguous statutory standards that provide an agency with discretion for when to act and against whom to enforce the action can narrow the discretion.
Ratemaking agencies normally must offer hearings before finally setting rates. These decisions hold that the official making the decision must review the evidence in the case and not merely consult with other agency officials who have considered the evidence.
As with other agencies, the FCC may narrow the scope of its licensing hearings by promulgating regulations that make its general licensing standard more concrete and particular. Under this decision, the FCC may deny a hearing to an applicant whose application clearly does not satisfy a requirement of valid regulation.
Across-the-board drug testing of government employees is constitutionally permissible.
If there is no citizens’ suit provision in a regulatory statute, a private right of action against a violator for damages may be implied. Because of separation of powers concerns over judicial creation of a cause of action, under current law, federal courts imply the private right of action only when it appears that Congress intended for the private right of action to be available.
If government seeks to reveal trade secrets or other valuable information, the Takings Clause may require it to provide compensation to the party whose information it reveals.
This is the process for establishing prices and other terms of service in a regulated industry
Often, state law provides parallel remedies that survive the enactment of a federal scheme, but sometimes, under the Supremacy Clause, federal law preempts state law.
Primary jurisdiction may not exist where a savings clause preserves parallel judicial remedies, but agency jurisdiction may overcome a savings clause if:
Enforcement through command and control regulation involves agencies promulgating and enforcing specific commands.
Under normal circumstances, the Fourth Amendment’s Warrant Clause requires an agency to obtain a search warrant to conduct an inspection without the regulated party’s consent. However, probably cause that violations are occurring is not necessary to obtain a warrant for an administrative inspection. Rather, agencies may obtain warrants by showing what?
This act requires that agencies obtain the approval of the office of Management and Budget before they may initiate new requirements that parties provide information to the agency.
The central feature of a ratemaking regime is the filing of a tariff, or rate schedule, by the regulated business. This doctrine holds that once filed and approved, filed rates have the status of binding law.