Legal Document

470 U.S. 821 105 S.Ct. 1649 84 L.Ed.2d 714 Margaret M. HECKLER, Secretary of Health and Human Services, Petitionerv.Larry Leon CHANEY et al. No. 83-1878. Argued Dec. 3, 1984. Decided March 20, 1985. Syllabus Respondent prison inmates were convicted capital offenses sentenced to death by lethal injection drugs. They petitioned the Food Drug Administration (FDA), alleging that use drugs for such a purpose violated Federal Food, Drug, Cosmetic Act (FDCA), requesting FDA take various enforcement actions prevent those violations. The refused request. Respondents then brought an action in District Court against petitioner making same claim seeking actions. granted summary judgment petitioner, holding nothing FDCA indicated intent circumscribe FDA's discretion or make it reviewable. Appeals reversed. Noting Administrative Procedure (APA) only precludes judicial review federal agency when is precluded statute, 5 U.S.C. § 701(a)(1), "committed law," 701(a)(2), court held 701(a)(2)'s exception applies where substantive statute leaves courts with "no law apply," here there was "law therefore refusal reviewable, moreover abuse discretion. Held: decision not requested respondents subject under APA. Pp. 827-838. (a) Under administrative agency's be had if question drawn so would have no meaningful standard which judge exercise In case, ("law") can taken "committed" decisionmaking absolutely. An presumed immune from 701(a)(2). Such has traditionally been discretion," does appear Congress enacting APA intended alter tradition. Accordingly, unreviewable unless discretion, provided standards defining limits 827-835. (b) presumption decisions institute proceedings are 701(a)(2) overcome provisions FDCA. Those commit complete decide how they should exercised. FDCA's prohibition "misbranding" introduction "new drugs," absent approval, do supply this apply." Nor "policy statement" indicating considered itself "obligated" certain investigative actions, plausibly read override rule expressly stating Commissioner shall object recommend civil criminal action. And section providing need report prosecution minor violations give rise negative implication required investigate purported "major" Act. 835-837. 231 U.S.App.D.C. 136, 718 F.2d 1174 (1983), Kenneth S. Geller, Washington, D.C., petitioner. Stephen Kristovich, respondents. Justice REHNQUIST delivered opinion Court. 1 This case presents extent its "discretion" undertake Act, 501 seq. (APA). several circumstances these punishment 52 Stat. 1040, as amended, 21 301 their We Columbia Circuit, both reviewable remanded directions "to fulfill statutory function." 153, 1174, 1191 (1983). 2 * laws States Oklahoma Texas. States, others, recently adopted method carrying out sentence. first FDA, claiming used purpose, although approved medical purposes stated on labels, human executions. alleged tested used, that, given likely administered untrained personnel, also induce quick painless intended. urged execution "unapproved drug" constituted violation Act's prohibitions "misbranding."1 suggested requirements approval drugs" applied, since now being new purpose. claimed approve "safe effective" before could distributed interstate commerce. See 355. investigatory perceived violations; affix warnings labels all unapproved unsafe execution, send statements drug manufacturers administrators adopt procedures seizing state prisons chain distribution who knowingly distribute purchase them execution. 3 responded, refusing detailed his disagreement respondents' understanding scope jurisdiction over concluding area generally unclear but any event exercised interfere particular aspect justice systems. He went state: 4 "Were clearly area, moreover, we believe authorized decline our inherent pursue matters. far uniform. Generally, initiated serious danger public health blatant scheme defraud. cannot conclude dangers present State laws, duly enactments furtherance proper functions. . ." filed instant suit United Columbia, asking prior petition.2 Jurisdiction grounded general federal-question 28 1331, sought APA, §§ 701-706. It began proposition "decisions executive departments agencies refrain instituting essentially courts." Chaney v. Schweiker, Civ. 81-2265 (DC, Aug. 30, 1982), App. Pet. Cert. 74a (emphasis original). cited 6 A divided panel Circuit majority discussing concluded did use. addressed Government's assertion refuse discussed Court's opinions at least assess whether "arbitrary, capricious, discretion." Abbott Laboratories Gardner, 387 139-141, 87 1507, 1510-1511, 18 681 (1967); 706(2)(A). noted 701, final action—including refusals act, see 551(13)—when law." Citing Dunlop Bachowski, 421 560, 95 1851, 44 377 (1975), Citizens Preserve Overton Park Volpe, 401 402, 91 814, 136 (1971), view exceptions narrowly construed, law" invoked left U.S.App.D.C., 146, F.2d, 1184 (citing Park, supra, U.S., 410, S.Ct., 820). "applies less force action." 1184. 7 found apply" form policy statement became "widespread" "endanger[ed] health." Id., 148, 1186 37 Fed.Reg. 16504 (1972)). "rule" binding FDA. Given strong review, foreclosed. proceeded act evidence assumed put animals sleep3 uses prisoners clinical experiments, refusal, reasons given, irrational, lead cruel protracted entitled more searching consideration. Court, order 8 dissenting expressed unreviewable, exercises "prosecutorial discretion" presumptively fall within APA's wary second-guessing enforce, expertise better policies available resources. likewise regulations provide basis court's decision. denied petition rehearing. 233 724 1030 (1984). certiorari implausible result power ensure 467 1251, 104 3532, 82 838 reverse. II 9 Appeals' three questions: (1) requested, (2) (3) arbitrary, reaching conclusion wrong, however, address thorny jurisdiction. For us, turns important determinations authority commerce may judicially reviewed. That turn involves construction two separate necessarily interrelated statutes, 10 comprehensive "agency actions," contained Any person "adversely affected aggrieved" action; 702, including "failure act," "judicial thereof," long "final other adequate remedy court," 704. applied governed 706. But had, party must clear hurdle 701(a). provides chapter "applies, according thereof, except that—(1) statutes preclude review; committed Petitioner urges 11 occasion interpret second 701(a) great detail. On face, obviously lend construction; indeed, one might wonder what difference exists between (a)(1) (a)(2). former seems easy application; requires involved determine decisions. approach respect cases Southern R. Co. Seaboard Allied Milling Corp., 442 444, 99 2388, 60 1017 (1979), 567, 1857. language " (a)(2) require similar inquiry. addition, commentators pointed further complicated tension literal reading (a)(2), exempts "discretion," primary prescribed 706(2)(A)—whether How it, ask, yet still discretion? K. Davis, Law 28:6 (1984) (hereafter Davis); Berger, Arbitrariness Judicial Review, 65 Colum.L.Rev. 55, 58 (1965). legislative history little help score. Mindful, common-sense principle sections effect, possible, every clause .," Menasche, 348 528, 538-539, 75 513, 519, L.Ed. 615 (1955), think satisfies each concerns. 12 (1971). dealt Transportation's building highway through park Memphis, Tennessee. relevant "shall approve" program project using parkland determined feasible alternatives available. 411, 821. Interested citizens challenged Secretary's arguing he satisfied statute's requirements. "threshold question" After setting 701(a), stated: "In indication prohibit most certainly 'showing "clear convincing evidence" intent' restrict access review. 141 [87 1511, 681] (1967). 13 14 "Similarly, 'committed discretion.' very narrow exception. indicates applicable rare instances 'statutes broad terms apply.' S.Rep. 752, 79th Cong., 1st Sess., 26 (1945)." 820-821 (footnote omitted). 15 above quote answers questions raised raises others. First, separates latter different circumstances; even affirmatively avoids conflict "abuse 706—if manageable judging impossible evaluate mentioned earlier, identifying class applies. 16 To point analysis differ significantly Appeals. apply Park. disagree, insistence "narrow construction" application reviewability Here broke tradition, law, sound reasoning. 17 involve affirmative set guidelines determining given. Refusals steps precisely opposite situation, situation recognized occasions many years prosecute process, absolute Batchelder, 114, 123-124, 2198, 2203-2204, 755 (1979); Nixon, 418 683, 693, 94 3090, 3100, 41 1039 (1974); Vaca Sipes, 386 171, 182, 903, 912, 842 Confiscation Cases, Wall. 454, 19 196 (1869). recognition existence attributable small part unsuitability enforcement. many. enforce often balancing number factors peculiarly expertise. Thus, occurred, resources best spent another, succeed acts, fits overall policies, and, enough all. technical charged enforcing. equipped than deal variables ordering priorities. Similar concerns animate principles will defer implementing, adopts implementing statute. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 435 543, 98 1197, 1211, 55 460 (1978); Train 60, 87, 1470, 1485, 43 731 (1975). addition concerns, note refuses coercive individual's liberty property rights, thus infringe upon areas called protect. Similarly, focus inasmuch some manner. reviewed exceeded powers. See, e.g., FTC Klesner, 280 19, 50 1, 74 138 (1929). Finally, recognize shares characteristics prosecutor Executive Branch indict—a regarded special province Branch, Constitution "take Care Laws faithfully executed." Const., Art. II, 3. 20 course list facilitate good reasons, intend Cf. Davis 28:5 (APA "common action). stating, emphasize unreviewable; rebutted follow exercising powers.4 establishing free disregard direction administers. limit wishes, either priorities, otherwise circumscribing discriminate among issues pursue. done open relied heavily Appeals, example supplied sufficient rebut unreviewability. union employee, Labor-Management Reporting Disclosure 29 481 (LMRDA), Labor file aside election. Section 482 filing complaint member, "[t]he finds probable cause occurred bring investigating plaintiff's claims declined suit, plaintiff rejected argument footnote agreement "an prosecutorial n. 7, 1858, 7. Our textual references "strong presumption" exception; content rely hold apply. turn, "principle inapplicable, because LMRDA "clearly defined" present. 'beyond capacity supervise.' Bachowski Brennan, 502 79, 87-88 (CA3 1974) (quoting 28.16, p. 984 (1970 Supp.)). 22 consistent unreviewability enforce. quite withdrew power. based "pragmatic considerations," 147, 1185, amount assessment interests stake justify intervention agencies' decisionmaking. carry delegated powers vigor appropriate body police performance. instance Congress, us If law; not, meaning section. III 23 FDCA, injunctions, 332, sanctions, 333 335, seizure offending food, drug, cosmetic article, 334. provision enforcement, 372, conduct examinations investigations added). Unlike issue Dunlop, 332 gives injunction sought, 334, seizures, framed permissive—the liable against." sanctions states baldly violates imprisoned fined." argue mandates violator adduce Congress' intention language, commonly Title Code. 471 (counterfeiting); 1001 (false Government officials); 1341 (mail fraud). unwilling attribute sweeping particularly charges recommending prosecution; prosecutions instituted Attorney General. 24 nevertheless authorities indicia Two summarily. reject 352(f)(1), 355, These simply irrelevant initiate proceedings. 25 find singularly unhelpful placed reliance. difficulty statement's vague properly rule. Although arise power, rather context describing physicians. conflicts CFR 10.45(d)(2) (1984), (i) [t]he matter Commissioner, attached never adopted. Whatever have, leaving side problem rules informed express rule.5 Respondents' third argument, 306 merits slightly provides: 27 "Nothing construed requiring prosecution, institution libel proceedings, whenever believes interest adequately served suitable written notice ruling." 336. seek draw however defined, supplies needed it. designed discover violations, already established satisfaction agency. speaks criteria possible IV remains one, included otherwise. holding, leave courts, No colorable made constitutional rights respondents, case. Johnson Robison, 415 361, 366, 1160, 1165, 39 389 Yick Wo Hopkins, 118 356, 372-374, 1064, 1072-1073, 30 220 (1886). fact ultimately imposing penalty import profound differences Eighth Amendment into domain law. Reversed. 31 BRENNAN, concurring. 32 Today holds individual response citizen requests I concur normal events, intends allow decisions, exist readily discernible nonenforcement 820, 33 agree despite presumption, "Congress administers." Ante, 833. Thus today flatly reach conduct, ante, 833, 4; engages pattern Adams Richardson, 156 267, 480 1159 (1973) (en banc), regulation lawfully promulgated 1658;1 (4) 836. imagine entirely illegitimate example, return bribe, foreclosed nonreviewability presumption. agencies, agents own creation, ignore jurisdictional, regulatory, statutory, commands, listed well Individual, isolated hundreds day. permissible presume mundane matters, congressional contrary proof above. 34 today's decision, join opinion.2 35 MARSHALL, concurring judgment. 36 Easy times produce bad rush ordained result, offer up principles, doctrines, calmer reflection, fuller implications concrete settings, eschew. my view, "presumption unreviewability" announced product lack discipline too easy. majority, eager reverse goes way label "implausible result," 827, reverse, should, along creates whole cloth notion "enforcement action" specifically Because fundamentally odds rule-of-law firmly embedded jurisprudence, seeks truncate emerging line subjecting rational principled constraint, because, end, indecipherable, hope come understood relic factual full neither confronted nor understood. write separately decision: like absence convincing" contrary, warrant deference when, suggest abused 38 petition, "under laws. [W]e decline, control injection." 40 legally requested. denies "written application, request interested connection proceedings."1 555(e). Whether explanation merits, grant relief offered attempted Second, correctly concludes, mandatory significant choose prosecute. Third, chose discretion—that problems viewed pressing pass muster. Certainly here, people currently misbranding around 200, integral elements regulatory pervasive direct control. 42 When mandate "far priorities." 831-832. As choosing allocate finite resources, choice substantial deference, valid alternative sort enabling statutes. then, resource-allocation accordance principle. rest ground. Instead, transforms arguments deferential wholly "enforcement" altogether—unreviewable rationale sham, vindictive personal motives, ignored cf. Logan Zimmerman Brush Co., 455 422, 102 1148, 71 265 (1982) (due process equal protection ignoring complaint). surely cry asserting leeway allocating suggesting factor caused stay hand. understandings acknowledges, entitles aggrieved action," 702 defined include 551(13)—to defeated Harlan's (1967), interpreting provisions: 45 "The material elucidating [the APA] manifests cover spectrum echoed theme noting 'generous provisions' 'hospitable' interpretation. [O]nly showing 'clear evidence' review." 140-141, 1511 (citations omitted; 46 H.R.Rep. 1980, 2d (1946) (to "must face withhold it"); Moog Industries, Inc. FTC, 355 414, 78 377, 380, 370 (1958) (Federal Trade Commission overturned "patent demonstrated).2 Rather confront Laboratories, perhaps seminal chooses it.3 support newfound unreviewability," resorts completely undefined unsubstantiated "tradition," 831, citation four cases. (1869).4 "tradition" rationale, flies stands flat, unsupported ipse dixit, doctrinal foundation majority's 47 Yet hardly action, suggests, dictum, General Counsel National Relations Board unfair labor practice complaint. dictum sound, later indicate results structure explicit withdraw 153(d), NLRB Sears, Roebuck & 132, 138, 1504, 1510, (1975).5 Neither discusses cases—Batchelder, Cases—all Batchelder maintain mere violate Constitution. involving suits confiscate aid rebellion, brings "wholly benefit States," Wall., 455, information leading "vested" right demand, "so concerned," id., 458, maintained. half-sentence "absolute case," apparent actually offers limited unreviewable. misleading, Nixon attempt validly regulations. cites it: faced specific makes powerless intervene. none rests way. 48 Moreover, inappropriate notions inaction unfettered suggests. noted, "the 1974 strongly reviewability." 9:6, 240 (1979). Blackledge Perry, 417 21, 28, 2098, 2102, 628 (1974), instead invoking "absolute" potentially impermissible. "retaliatory use" longer tolerated. Thigpen Roberts, 468 27, 2916, 2918, prosecutors guilty pleas promises kept. Allison, 431 63, 97 1621, (1977); Santobello New York, 404 257, 262, 92 495, 498, 427 rejecting improper Bordenkircher Hayes, 434 357, 663, 54 604 (1978), laid exercised: 49 "There doubt breadth country's legal system vests prosecuting attorneys carries potential institutional abuse. though be, undoubtedly exercise." 365, 669. Wayte 598, 608, 1524, 1531, 547 (1985). prosecutions, unreviewability." Vorenberg, Decent Restraint Prosecutorial Power, Harv.L.Rev. 1521, 1537-1543 (1981). threshold prosecutor's impermissible 51 about translate act. traditions immunize scrutiny administrator motivated Marshall Jerrico, 446 238, 249, 100 1610, 1616, 64 182 (1980) Criminal vindicate intangible interests, common society whole, occurred; society's assuring punished. Linda R.S. Richard D., 410 614, 619, 93 1146, 1149, 536 ("[A] private lacks cognizable nonprosecution another"). contrast, typically future injuries cognizable—injuries misbranded drugs, nuclear plants, see, Florida Light Lorion, 729, 1598, 643 (1985)—or obtain palpable benefits bestow—such elections corruption, Entitlements receive run classes individuals whom singled beneficiaries. focused plant operated safely jail confiscated past traditional enforce—or enforce—may burdens beneficiary." 1617. Perhaps important, sine qua non inherited reluctance constrain discretionary power—to rationalize fairer Since passage sustained effort "continuously narro[w] category exempted Shapiro, Discretion: Next Stage, Yale L.J. 1487, 1489, Discretion necessary variety functions, veil laziness, incompetency, will, reason presence bar considering illegal arbitrary L. Jaffe, Control Action 375 demonstration rulemaking, adjudicating, acting failing become stagnant backwaters caprice lawlessness. "Law reached finest moments freed man unlimited ruler, military official, bureaucrat." Wunderlich, 342 98, 101, 72 154, 156, 96 113 (1951). 53 reasons,6 reliance fading talisman, inappropriate. Stewart Sunstein, Public Programs Private Rights, 1195, 1285-1286, (discussing discretion); Note, Review Inaction, 83 627, 658-661 (1983) (same). context, ought penalties health, safety, welfare problem. relies refuted powerfully entrenched lower act.7 recognizes attempting 832, untenable; fueling birth reality governmental just devastating effect life, liberty, pursuit happiness Frankfurter, careful experienced student wrote "any distinction, such, 'negative' 'affirmative' orders, touchstone [agency action] serves useful purpose." Rochester Telephone 307 125, 143, 59 754, 764, 1147 (1939).8 facingthe effects regularly we, responded solutions assure fidelity objectives: demand explain explanations elaborated, injunctions "unlawfully withheld unreasonably delayed," 706, taken. Harv.L.Rev., 1279. solution, hoped acted greater efforts responding scalpel blunderbuss. sure, takes solace created "presumption" unreviewability, powers." 832-833. implies positive constitutional, ibid., sole source limitations channelled background enacted thought displace APA.9 stems interest, vindictiveness retaliation, traces corrupt motives remediable.10 Even "guidelines" precluding bases departed rationality fair APA.11 historical practice, arguably depart explanation, informal Traditional "meaningful standards" allowed trump principles. 56 reference guidance "substantive statute" meant encompass fathom have. abnegation jurisdiction, abdication responsibilities, offend seem always inquire deciding applies.12 Judge Friendly said ago, "made without inexplicably rested considerations relevant." Wong Wing Hang INS, 360 715, 719 (CA2 1966). event, finding reviewing albeit due 57 706(A)(2) failure manifested suitably light flexibility allegedly deprives exposes harms protection, bounds. Arbitrariness: Synthesis, 965 (1969); modern state, enormous powers, ill, inaction, citizens. recognized, prevalent, multifaceted admit single facile solution "presumptively unreviewable." Over time, understood, mandating eyes reasoning asked recognizing task failures legitimate allocation scarce budgetary approach, literally, role cases, today. 352(f): "A device deemed [u]nless labeling bears evidentiary hearing, hearing having apart serving prelude plaintiffs demanded petition." 77a, 15. invoke rulemaking explained unlike manufacturer fell squarely why distinction "rational." solely belief justifiably "consciously policy" extreme responsibilities. banc). situations conferring urge, lawyers "memorandum dismissal" considers "binding." "Federal Register sets forth current position o[n] status prescription drugs." memorandum authority, "binding" sense word. difficult counsel litigation establish "rules" bind entire prospectively. orderly head. Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Assn. Farm Mutual Ins. 463 29, 40-44, 103 2856, 2865-2867, 77 443 (failure revoke previously APA). adhere unusual forbidden Fourteenth Amendments, Gregg Georgia, 428 227, 2909, 2971, 859 (1976) (BRENNAN, J., dissenting). My concurrence misread expression injections independent matter. correct, "profound Amendment" influence consideration purely 838. All Members agreed denial there. 571-575, 1859-1862; 594, 1870 (REHNQUIST, part). revisionist facts emerged. suggestion asserts 4, inconsistent intent, presuppose explaining Senate Committee Report accompanying engage therefore, per se reversal." S.Doc. 248, 201 (1946). McGowan observed, "this sometimes mentioned" Report. SEC, 124, 14, 606 1031, 1043, 462-463, 2394, 2398-2399, ironic Sipes Cases brief unsuccessfully pressed accepted today: Brief O.T. 1974, 74-466, pp. 25-31. supra (concluding, after extensive examination 15(8)(a) Interstate Commerce unreviewable). Legal historians developed England America largely simultaneously time. Langbein, Controlling Germany, U.Chi.L.Rev. 439, 443-446 (1974). unavailable. scholars tradition time virtually accounts scholar following rhetorical "Is settled during nineteenth century assuming intrusion administration unfortunate? Is while Supreme actuated 1840 remark 'The interference Courts performance ordinary duties government, productive mischief.' [citing Decatur Paulding, 497, 516, 559 (1840) ]. twentieth-century discovery protect abuses avoid taking function? successes fully recognized? "On know effective check abuses, fresh look prevents function?" Discretionary 211 (1969) Bargmann Helms, 230 164, 715 638 (1983); EPA, 683 753, 767-768 1982); WWHT, FCC, 218, 656 807 (1981); Carpet, Linoleum Resilient Tile Layers, Local Union 419 Brown, 564 (CA10 1981); 1031 British Airways Port Authority 1002, 1012-1013 1977); Pennsylvania Flood Insurers, 520 1975); REA Express, CAB, 507 1974); Romney, 490 1360 (CADC 1973) banc); International Harvester Ruckelshaus, 155 478 (1973); Rockbridge Lincoln, 449 567 (CA9 1971); Environmental Fund, 142 74, 439 584 (1971); Hardin, 391, 1093 (1970); Medical Rights 139 226, 432 659 (1970), vacated moot, 403, 577, 560 (1972); Trailways England, 412 926 (CA1 1969); Union, Auto., Aero. Agric. Implement Workers NLRB, 1330 (CA6 1970); Citizen Research Group Auchter, 554 F.Supp. 242 (DC 1983), rev'd part, 226 413, 1150 Sierra Club Gorsuch, 551 785 (ND Cal.1982); Hoffmann-LaRoche, Weinberger, 425 890 NAACP Levi, 1109 1976); Guerrero Garza, (WD Wis.1976); Souder 367 808, 811 1973); City-Wide Coalition Against Childhood Lead Paint Poisoning Philadelphia Housing Auth., 356 123 (ED Pa.1973); American Veneman, 349 1311 1972). disavows refusals. 825, 2. beneficiaries harms, loss deserved benefits, implicates substantially Frankfurter length expose fallacy inaction: '[N]egative order' 'affirmative art. 'Negative' really obfuscating adjective implied search distinction—non-action action—which real rest, seen, orders framework justiciability. 'affirmative,' problems, unilluminating mischief-making outmoded 'nonfeasance' 'misfeasance.' ". dismissing maintaining quo function, less, directing change canons adoption raise merely continue. disposition jurisdiction." 140-142, 762-763 added; footnotes Davis' correct incorporated into, obliterated by, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith, Curran, 456 353, 378, 1825, 1839, ("[W]e examine perception shaping reshaping"). injecting financial otherwise, contexts questions." 249-250, 1616-1617, (1980). Indeed, powerful understanding, explicitly legislature, legislature understanding." 1231 (1982). survive judgment, able calling justifying inability so.

Classification Label: 8