Hearings

The APA provides for elaborate adjudicatory hearings, which are triggered by separate statutes or constitutional due process. Coverage does not extend to decisions based entirely on inspections, tests, or elections, military and foreign affairs, and some additional matters. When adjudication is required, persons entitled to notice of an agency hearing shall be timely informed of the time, place, and nature of the hearing; the legal authority and jurisdiction under which the hearing is to be held; and the matters of fact and law asserted.

Hearings are to be scheduled with regard to the convenience and necessity of the parties or their representatives. The agency must provide the parties the opportunity for the submission and consideration of facts, arguments, offers of settlement, or proposals of adjustment when time, the nature of the proceeding, and the public interest permit. The federal employees who preside over adjudications have several different titles and levels of skill and independence. For the sake of convenience, they can be considered under two headings: ALJs and all others.

The title administrative law judge replaced that of hearing examiner in 1972. Whatever the name, the main concerns with ALJs have always been impartiality, competence, and efficiency. The problem of ALJ impartiality is complicated. Despite their independence from agency hierarchies, ALJs are part of the organizations in which they work. They are likely to share many organizational goals and values.

Their responses to political and media criticisms of their agencies may be identical to those of other employees. Association with an agency, especially over a long period, is likely to have an impact on their worldviews and judgments.