Arbitrary & Capricious Review
Administrative Law · Lesson 09
Arbitrary & Capricious Review
這一課問的是：機關之決定是否任意、專橫、或裁量濫用？
ActorActObjectStandardConsequence
Issue · what this lesson is really about
Was the agency's decision arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion?
這一課問的是：機關之決定是否任意、專橫、或裁量濫用？
Trigger words & phrases that should flag this issue:
arbitrarycapriciousreasonedexplanationalternative
Core Terminology · 7 must-know
Tap a card to flip and reveal the meaning.
§ 706(2)(A)
Tap to see meaning
Standard for review of informal agency action.
§ 706(2)(A)。
hard look
Tap to see meaning
State Farm framework requiring reasoned decisionmaking.
認真審視。
State Farm factors
Tap to see meaning
Failed to consider important aspect, ran counter to evidence, considered irrelevant, implausible.
State Farm 因素。
change of position
Tap to see meaning
Agency must acknowledge change + provide good reasons.
立場改變。
considered alternatives
Tap to see meaning
Must rationally consider reasonable alternatives.
考慮替代方案。
post-hoc rationalization
Tap to see meaning
Court reviews based on contemporaneous record, not later explanations.
事後合理化。
Chenery doctrine
Tap to see meaning
Court reviews based on agency's stated reasoning.
Chenery 原則。
Rule Sentence · the workhorse
Under APA § 706(2)(A), a reviewing court must set aside agency action that is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; under State Farm, this requires reasoned decisionmaking — the agency must consider important aspects, explain its choice in light of the facts, and not run counter to the evidence.
Sentence Anatomy · 5 roles, 5 colors
Every rule sentence breaks into five visual roles.
Actor 行為人reviewing court審查法院
Act 行為applying A&C review適用 A&C 審查
Object 對象agency decision機關決定
Standard 法律標準reasoned decisionmaking充分推理
Consequence 後果upheld or set aside維持或廢棄
Casebook Snapshot · a real American case
Department of Commerce v. New York
Holding. The Commerce Secretary's decision to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census was arbitrary and capricious because the agency's stated reason (Voting Rights Act enforcement) was pretextual; the contemporary record disclosed the real motive was different.
Why it matters. DOC v. NY: pretextual reasoning fails A&C review; agencies must give the real reason.
Commerce v. NY：藉口理由不通過 A&C；須給真實理由。
Common Mistakes · what trips students
✗ A&C 為 lenient。
✓ Hard-look review can be searching; reasoned explanation required.
認真審視可嚴；須充分推理。
Mini IRAC · build the Application
Issue. Was the agency's rescission of its prior rule arbitrary and capricious where the agency failed to consider alternatives to outright rescission?
Rule. Under State Farm, agency action is arbitrary and capricious if the agency fails to consider important aspects of the problem, including reasonable alternatives.
Application (model). The agency rescinded its prior rule entirely without considering middle-ground alternatives. Because A&C review under State Farm requires considering important aspects including alternatives, the fact that the agency failed to consider any middle-ground alternatives between maintaining and rescinding the rule means the agency failed to engage in reasoned decisionmaking.
Pick the right element for each blank:
g1.
g2.
Conclusion. Therefore, the rescission was arbitrary and capricious and must be set aside.
MBE Check · multiple choice
Agency abruptly changes its longstanding interpretation of a regulation without acknowledging the change or explaining why. Under A&C review:
Practice Drill · tap to build the rule
Drop the chips here in correct order:
Tap chips to add → tap chips in the target to remove: