Evening star., 1939-02-05
Lands Hits Exempting
Certain Agencies in
Judicial Reviews
Tells Law Conference
Political Controversy
Should Not Decide

James M. Lands, dean of the Har-
yard Law School, yesterday criti-
cized, and implied political motives
is the reason for proposed legisla-
ton subjecting the acts of some
administrative agencies Of the Gov
ernment to judicial review but ex-
empting others.
Dean Lands, who formerly was
chairman of the Securities and Ex-
change Commission, spoke at the
afternoon session at the admins
trative law conference held at the
Chamber of Commerce under the
auspices of the George Washington
University Law School.
Louis G. Caldwell, a former gen.
eral counsel of the Federal Com
munications Commission, speaking
at last nights meeting. condemned
what was termed law-making by
press releases and speeches by
members of the Federal Communi-
cations Commissions.
In discussing the question of jul
dicial review. Dean Lands asked,
Why, for example. is the Inter
state Commerce Commission and
the Federal Trade Commission ex-
empted? Is it because they are not
the center Of political storms as
some other agencies are?"
why should they be free from
judicial review, while the regulation
Of exchanges and the acts of the
Labor Relations Board are subjected
to it?" he continued.
Uniform Policy Urged.
Dean Lands declared he was not
the proponent Of one agency against
another, but appealed that the prob
lem be dealt with on its merits"
instead Of singing out some agen-
cies for inclusion in the proposed
act because they are the center of
political controversy.
Instead, he asserted, he advocated
the development of some kind of
rational philosophy to deal with the
relation Of administrative processes
and administrative review"
He declared there are happy and
unhappy approaches" to the field
Of judicial review and cited the
record in rate regulation as a par
ticular example of failure.
AS a result of the courts failure
in rate regulation, he pointed out,
the public has been turning to other
means. He cited the Tennessee VAL
ley Authority as an example of the
Government resorting to manage
rial processes to achieve fair rates
for utilities.
In the panel discussion that fol-
lowed. David L. E. Robinson, gen.
eral counsel Of the Federal Power
Commission. declared: This ques-
ton OF administrative law and Judi
cial review is not a New Deal issue"
1t arose before 1882, he claimed.
I'VE should not formulate our views
on that question from the point of
view in support or non support of
any administration" Mr.. Robinson
said.
A>o oShSi al NulC OSSlUlc.
Carl Mcfarland, Assistant Attor-
ney General, another member of the
panel, asserted that no rule of
judicial review can be framed to fit
every case. The answer to the
question, he claimed. is matter
Of the proper attitude to take
toward it.
Mr.. Caldwell spoke generally at
the evening session on the problems
of procedure facing attorneys prac-
ticing before administrative tribu-
nails but dealt more specifically with
the Federal Communications Com
mission.
The new procedure of the COM
mission was defended by William j.
Dempsey. general counsel of the
commission, and the two addresses
were followed by discussions of the
problems by Prof Charles Sager
Collier of the George Washington
University Law School. Ewin L..
Davis, member of the Federal
Trade Commission, and Ben S.
Fisher, a member of the F. G. C..