Delegated Legislation in USA: An Overview
🇺🇸 Delegated Legislation in the USA: An Overview
I. Meaning of Delegated Legislation
In the U.S., delegated legislation refers to rules, regulations, and administrative orders made by federal or state administrative agencies under authority delegated by Congress or state legislatures.
Also known as: Administrative law, rulemaking, or agency regulations.
These rules carry the force of law, provided they are within the scope of the delegated authority.
II. Constitutional Basis
➤ U.S. Constitution: Article I, Section 1
“All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States…”
This clause establishes the non-delegation doctrine, meaning Congress cannot delegate its legislative powers to another branch. However, Congress may delegate authority to make rules so long as it provides an "intelligible principle" to guide the agency.
III. Why Delegated Legislation is Needed in the USA
Complexity of modern governance
Expertise required in technical fields
Flexibility and responsiveness
Efficient functioning of the administrative state
IV. Types of Delegated Legislation in the USA
Legislative Rules – Have the force of law; issued under authority of a statute.
Interpretative Rules – Explain how an agency interprets a statute.
Procedural Rules – Govern internal operations and procedures of agencies.
Orders – Issued in specific adjudicatory proceedings.
Guidance Documents – Non-binding policy statements.
V. Process of Rulemaking (Administrative Procedure Act, 1946)
The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) governs rulemaking by federal agencies. Two types of rulemaking:
Formal Rulemaking – Requires a hearing, with witness testimony and cross-examination.
Informal Rulemaking (Notice-and-Comment) – Most common; involves:
Notice in Federal Register
Public comment period
Final rule publication
VI. Key Case Laws on Delegated Legislation in the USA
Let’s now examine more than four important U.S. Supreme Court cases that have shaped the doctrine of delegated legislation.
1. J.W. Hampton Jr. & Co. v. United States (1928)
Issue: Whether Congress can delegate tariff-setting authority to the President.
Held: Yes, so long as Congress lays down an "intelligible principle" to guide the executive.
Significance: Introduced the "intelligible principle" test, still used today to judge permissible delegation.
2. Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan (1935)
Issue: Delegation of power under the National Industrial Recovery Act to the President.
Held: Unconstitutional delegation – the Act failed to provide adequate standards.
Significance: One of the few cases where the Court struck down a law for excessive delegation.
3. A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (1935)
Facts: Challenged code-making powers under the National Industrial Recovery Act.
Held: Congress gave too broad a delegation of power without standards.
Significance: Reinforced the non-delegation doctrine. Last major case where delegation was struck down.
4. Yakus v. United States (1944)
Issue: Price control regulations under the Emergency Price Control Act.
Held: Upheld the delegation as the Act gave adequate guiding standards.
Significance: The Court began relaxing the non-delegation doctrine, supporting wartime administrative needs.
5. Whitman v. American Trucking Associations (2001)
Facts: Challenged the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act to set air quality standards.
Held: The delegation was constitutional. The statute provided sufficient guidelines.
Significance: Reaffirmed the intelligible principle standard, and that Congress can delegate broad authority if properly guided.
6. INS v. Chadha (1983)
Facts: Involved a legislative veto of an executive action under delegated authority.
Held: Legislative veto is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers and bicameralism.
Significance: Even though Congress can delegate power, it cannot retain control in a way that violates constitutional procedure.
VII. Summary Table of Cases
| Case | Year | Principle Established |
|---|---|---|
| J.W. Hampton Jr. v. U.S. | 1928 | "Intelligible principle" test for valid delegation |
| Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan | 1935 | Delegation struck down for lack of standards |
| A.L.A. Schechter Poultry v. U.S. | 1935 | Broad delegation ruled unconstitutional |
| Yakus v. U.S. | 1944 | Delegation upheld; war powers context |
| INS v. Chadha | 1983 | Legislative veto declared unconstitutional |
| Whitman v. American Trucking Assoc. | 2001 | Broad delegation upheld; reaffirmed "intelligible principle" |
VIII. Current Status of Delegated Legislation in the USA
The non-delegation doctrine remains a theoretical limit, but it is rarely enforced strictly.
Courts typically defer to agencies under the Chevron Deference doctrine (Chevron v. NRDC, 1984) when interpreting ambiguous statutes. However, this deference has recently been under judicial reconsideration.
There is growing debate over whether modern administrative agencies wield too much legislative power.
Conclusion
Delegated legislation in the United States is an essential aspect of modern governance, allowing Congress to focus on policy while agencies handle technical and regulatory details. While the Constitution limits delegation through the non-delegation doctrine, courts have upheld most delegations as long as they include an intelligible principle. Through landmark cases, the U.S. Supreme Court has carefully balanced efficiency, expertise, and constitutional boundaries in maintaining a functional administrative state.
RELATED Blog
0 comments