There is now confirmation that the Lucia case on the constitutionality of Administrative Law Judges (ALJs), as presently appointed, will be heard by the Supreme Court in April of this year. There's an accelerated briefing schedule.
I don't think the Supreme Court should find ALJs unconstitutional. I don't think they will. If they do find ALJs unconstitutional, they may find some way to exclude Social Security ALJs although I don't know how. If you're off on the sort of excursion into pure logic, possibly tinged by a strong desire to prevent regulation of businesses, that leads you to find that ALJs are unconstitutional in other agencies, I don't see how you'd be concerned about the practical consequences for Social Security. Exempting Social Security removes the pure logic part and makes the desire to hinder regulation of businesses obvious. The pretense that your actions were dictated by the Constitution would be hard to maintain.
2 comments:
Hopefully, 5/9ths of the SCOTUS will see the DOJ's brief for what it is: a back-door attempt to further politicize administrative agencies and turn govt employment back to a spoils system by allowing at-will employment.
The link offered is in no way confirmation that the oral argument will be scheduled in April, nor of an accelerated briefing schedule. It is a letter from the Petitioner's attorney indicating he understands that the case will be argued in April and suggesting a briefing schedule. The Court has yet to set either a date for oral argument or a briefing schedule.
When the matter is decided, I don't see any way the Court will not find that SEC ALJs are unconstitutionally selected. The only question is will they limit their holding to SEC ALJs and reserve ruling on other Agencies' ALJs until those issues are presented.
Post a Comment