How Administrative Courts Work: A Guide to Agency Hearings and Appeals

Administrative law courts operate within executive branch agencies and play a critical role in ensuring that government agencies act within their legal authority and that individuals and businesses have a fair chance to challenge agency decisions.

When you need to contest an agency decision or are facing an enforcement action, it’s essential to know how administrative courts work. If you need guidance on your rights, contact an administrative law attorney for legal advice.

What Is Administrative Law?

When Congress passes laws, their implementation and enforcement are handled by executive branch agencies. Administrative law is the body of rules governing the creation and enforcement of these regulations and agency rules. It ensures that agencies act fairly and within their legal scope when making decisions that impact individuals and businesses.

For example, if a government agency denies your professional license or imposes a fine, administrative law provides a process for you to challenge that decision. Administrative law often focuses on how executive branch agencies use their authority to regulate individuals and businesses.

At the federal level, the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) outlines how agencies create, enforce, and resolve disputes about rules, and most states have enacted laws that mirror the federal APA, though details vary by state.

The Administrative Law Court: A Unique Arena

Administrative hearings are similar to court proceedings. They are conducted by administrative law judges (ALJs), who provide a neutral forum for resolving disputes between individuals or businesses and government agencies. At the state level, hearings may occur in one centralized Office of Administrative Hearings; at the federal level, within an agency’s internal office of judges.

ALJs are judges with expertise in specific areas of law, appointed on the basis of merit pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). An ALJ may also be referred to as a hearing examiner, hearing officer, or trial examiner.

There are about 2,000 federal ALJs who conduct hearings and resolve administrative disputes and claims. ALJs are employed by a particular administrative agency. Although they are appointed by the agency head, they can be assigned to hear cases for another agency when caseloads are high.

The Social Security Administration employs the most ALJs. Other agencies with ALJs include the U.S. Department of Labor, the U.S. Department of the Interior, and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Some state-level ALJs working for state agencies function much like federal ALJs, exercising broad independent authority over the matters pending before them. In other contexts, ALJs are afforded minimal power and authority, and their decisions are treated more as recommendations.

What Do ALJs Do?

ALJs perform judicial functions within the Executive Branch and adjudicate hearings before them. They perform the following tasks:

• Conduct formal fair hearings (e.g., hear evidence, oral arguments, and cross-examination of witnesses)
• Make findings of facts
• Decide questions of law
• Apply agency regulations
• Issuing initial or recommended final decisions
• Administer oaths

The judges exercise independence in their decisions and are expected to ensure a fair hearing process, but their findings are subject to review and modification by agency heads.

What Types of Cases Do Administrative Law Judges Hear?

ALJs hear cases involving laws and regulations that fall in a few categories:

• Regulatory cases. Relate to the economic regulation of rates and services offered by U.S. companies. A company may challenge fines, penalties, or enforcement action by agencies.
• Entitlement cases. Involve adjudication of claims about benefits provided by law, such as disability benefits under the Social Security Act or workers’ compensation benefits under the Longshoremen and Harbor Workers Compensation Act.
• Enforcement cases. Include actions taken by federal agencies against individuals or businesses to enforce federal laws and regulations, like the EPA penalizing a company for exceeding Clean Air pollutant limits.

A wide range of individuals and industries are affected by administrative law.

Differences Between Administrative and Traditional Courts

Administrative hearings follow processes and procedures similar to those in traditional courtrooms, but there are key distinctions:

• Jurisdiction. Administrative courts handle disputes involving government agencies, while traditional courts handle civil, criminal, and constitutional matters.
• Formality. Administrative hearings are less formal and often faster than trials in state and federal courts.
• Process. Administrative hearings are typically “bench trials.” This means that there are no juries. The ALJ makes the decision.
• Decision-making. ALJs make rulings based on agency rules and regulations. They serve as both the trier of fact and the judge.

An attorney is not required at an administrative hearing, but parties may retain one.

The Process and Procedures at Administrative Hearings

If an individual or business disagrees with an agency decision, they have the right, under due process of law, to request an administrative hearing.

Filing a Complaint or Appeal

The party filing the complaint or appeal is called the petitioner or appellant. The opposing party is called the respondent. Parties may seek to contest enforcement actions, license denials, or benefit reductions. This petition is similar to pleadings in a typical court case in federal or state court.

The process begins with a hearing notice that is sent to all interested parties. The notice contains:

• The time, place, and nature of the hearing
• The legal authority for the hearing
• The issues involved
• The filing deadlines

Although administrative proceedings can be less formal than in a state or federal trial court, the deadlines and timing requirements are strict.

Pre-Administrative Hearing Procedures

In some cases, the ALJ will hold a pre-hearing with the parties after the notice of hearing is issued. It can be in person or remote.

The pre-hearing conference provides the parties with an opportunity to agree on the undisputed facts and the scope of the dispute.

During the pre-hearing stage, the parties may:

• Take depositions to gather testimony under oath that can be used during the hearing
• Issue a subpoena to compel witnesses to testify or to obtain documents relevant to the case
• Work toward a settlement before the administrative proceeding

The Administrative Hearing

Administrative hearings resemble judicial proceedings in some ways. There are:

• Opening statements
• The presentation of documentary evidence
• Examination of witnesses
• Closing statements

The ALJ facilitates the parties’ introduction of evidence into the administrative record for consideration at the hearing. A final judgment is issued after the ALJ considers the questions of fact and questions of law.

The ALJ’s Decision

Following the administrative hearing, the parties often submit briefs to the ALJ summarizing their positions before the ALJ issues a ruling. The burden of proof in an administrative matter is with the party that files the complaint or appeals from the administrative decision.

The ALJ reviews all case-related material, including the hearing transcript and evidence in the administrative record. The ALJ also reviews any post-hearing briefs submitted after the administrative proceeding.

Following this review, the ALJ issues a final order, which is similar to a court decision. The decision must identify the following:

• The applicable law
• The relevant facts
• How the law applies to the case facts presented

If a party does not agree with an ALJ’s ruling, the party has the right to appeal the decision.

Appealing an Administrative Decision to Federal Court

It may be possible to appeal the ALJ’s decision to a federal district court, which has limited jurisdiction, and then to a court of appeals. Statutes, including the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), provide the legal authority for when and how courts review agency actions.

Before a case can be appealed to a federal court, the administrative agency’s internal appellate review process must be followed. This is known as exhausting your administrative remedies. In most cases, you are required to pursue all agency remedies before appealing. In large agencies, the internal review process can be extensive.

Judicial review is only available if the agency action is final. The U.S. Supreme Court has outlined two requirements for finality:

1. The action must represent the agency’s final decision
2. The agency action determined rights and obligations that have legal consequences

Typically, an appellate court looks to whether the agency’s decision is supported by substantial evidence. If an appellate court finds an error in the ALJ’s decision, it may remand the case back to the administrative agency for further proceedings or reconsideration. Except under very limited circumstances, an appellate court does not conduct a de novo or from-scratch review of the evidence from the initial administrative hearing.

Get Legal Help for Your Administrative Law Matter

It is critical to understand your rights by researching the administrative agency’s website and rules. Each agency has its own procedures.

Contact an administrative law attorney for legal advice and help with your government agency claim.