The regulatory agencies are independent bodies that are created by the constitution of a certain state, in order to regulate various matters of economy in a country. According to Hall (2006), a regulatory body may also adjudicate on a matter where it represents and protects the human rights of individuals. The federal state constitution has stated that, the president has the power to appoint the independent regulatory agencies.
The agencies appointed by the president are however subject to be approved by the senate, where the senate refuses to approve a certain regulatory commission with valid reasons, the president may have to reconsider the appointment. The major leaders of the various independent regulatory bodies cannot be removed from their positions by the president at his will.
The members who are elected to participate in various regulatory commissions must be qualified to act in that capacity, and should have had an appropriate experience in the industry in which they may be selected to participate in. The composition of the members should constitute representatives from all political parties. The federal state requires that, members from the two parties should be appointed to the regulatory commissions, and that no member should be discriminated or removed from office due to political issues.
The Essay on Herbert Hoover President Public Appointed
Herbert Hoover By: Meagan All anSon of a Quaker blacksmith, Herbert Clark Hoover brought to the Presidency an unparalleled reputation for public service as an engineer, administrator, and humanitarian. Born in an Iowa village in 1874, he grew up in Oregon. He enrolled at Stanford University when it opened in 1891, graduating as a mining engineer. He married his Stanford sweetheart, Lou Henry, and ...
In the exercise of duty, the regulatory bodies have powers to perform the quasi-legislative functions, and the quasi-judicial functions. Hall (2006) posited that, though the independent regulatory agencies are supposed to act freely with no political interference or any interference from the president, they are required to follow the due process in their operations. The regulatory commissions are supposed to give respect to the law in the interpretation and application, failure to which the supreme court can reverse a decision made by a regulatory commission.
The federal State was faced by a judicial case where the independent regulatory body was required to exercise the quasi-judicial power to assist in the determination of a case, where the complainant was not satisfied by the act of dismissal that was carried out by his previous employer, due to failure of the complainant to comply with certain working rules and regulations.
In the case of King v. National Transportation and Safety Board, a worker by the name King was among other workers who had been subjected under the regulations of the Federal Aviation and Administrative rules. King served the Northwest Airlines as a professional mechanic.
The Federal Aviation rules required that one worker at the airline be selected for a drug test. The company conducted a random selection and King was picked to be a representative of the company in taking the drug test. King was required by the Federal Aviation rules to give a urine sample within a period of three hours which he did not. The Federal Aviation and Regulatory board advised King to take a lot of water in order to help him avail the urine sample at the required time, the board could not under any circumstances determine whether King followed the instructions or not. However, no medical report was provided to explain why King could not be in a position to provide the urine sample at the required time.
Due to failure of complying with the regulations required by the Federal Aviation and Administrative rules, the Northwest Airlines sacked king from work. At the same time, King was deprived off his mechanic certificate by the Federal Aviation Board, due to failure of complying with the regulations which he was subjected to, as one of the Northwest Airline workers. The Federal Aviation and Administrative Board upheld the decision taken, where king was dismissed from work and deprived off his mechanic certificate.
The Essay on Federal Vs State Courts
The United States is at the forefront of modern democracy. Its unique three branched system allows the government to operate under a quasi-idealistic form of checks and balances. As outlined by the U.S. Constitution, the judicial branch of government serves as the interpreter of the law and is “one of the most sophisticated judicial systems in the world.”1 This complexity is a product of balance ...
When King appealed to the Supreme court, the court upheld the decision of the board and made a ruling to the following effect, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Aviation and Administrative Board had a right and duty to act as a review court for any decisions which are made by the Federal Aviation and Administrative rules, touching on certification. The Supreme court stated that, the duty of the Federal court is to review any decisions from a different view from that of the board, but put into consideration the expertise that is applied by the board, when it carried certain steps in order to arrive at the decision.
The Supreme court further held that, the Federal Aviation and Administrative Board had not abused its discretion, when it made a decision stating that King had not given any good reason as to why he failed to follow the procedure for drug testing. It was held that, though the procedure had not put in place a mandatory requirement for a person to drink water, which was sensible, King should have shown proper medical reasons as to why he could not provide the urine sample. The Supreme Court therefore upheld the decision of the board.
From the ruling of the above case, an independent regulatory agency has discretionary powers to make a decision on a certain matter. According to Hall (2006), the agency must ensure that the discretion is exercised within the limits of the law and in exercise of the due process. The court found that, in the interpretation of the facts of the case and the law applying in the case at hand, the board had not contradicted any plain meaning of the state law, and that the decision was properly made. The regulatory agency must also ensure that where a legislative power is exercised, such power must be exercised in accordance with the law and by considering the interest of the public (Hall, 2006).
