{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}


0538452803_269417 - Procedure Act does not require such...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
BLTC-9e Sample Answers for End-of-Chapter Hypothetical Questions with Sample Answer Chapter 38: Administrative Law 38–2 Hypothetical Question with Sample Answer Assume that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), using proper procedures, adopts a rule describing its future investigations. This new rule covers all future circumstances in which the FDA wants to regulate food additives. Under the new rule, the FDA is not to regulate food additives without giving food companies an opportunity to cross-examine witnesses. At a subsequent time, the FDA wants to regulate methylisocyanate, a food additive. The FDA undertakes an informal rulemaking procedure, without cross-examination, and regulates methylisocyanate. Producers protest, saying that the FDA promised them the opportunity for cross-examination. The FDA responds that the Administrative
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: Procedure Act does not require such cross-examination and that it is free to withdraw the promise made in its new rule. If the producers challenge the FDA in court, on what basis would the court rule in their favor? Sample Answer: The court will consider first whether the agency followed the procedures prescribed in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Ordinarily, courts will not require agencies to use procedures beyond those of the APA. Courts will, however, compel agencies to follow their own rules. If an agency has adopted a rule granting extra procedures, the agency must provide those extra procedures, at least until the rule is formally rescinded. Ultimately, in this case, the court will most likely rule for the food producers....
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online