Every American knows that when you are sued or accused of a crime, you have a right to a fair trial. That includes an independent judge, fixed rules of evidence, and often a jury.
But if you find yourself in the crosshairs of one of America’s regulatory agencies, you’re likely to end up in a different sort of “trial” altogether.
Regulatory agencies have their own in-house tribunals that look like courts, but in fact violate the most fundamental aspects of due process and the rule of law.
If a regulatory agency believes you have violated a statute or a regulation, it can haul you before its own biased tribunal, in which you could face crushing fines and the prospect of losing your home, business, or livelihood.
In short, if you find yourself in one of these government tribunals, you’re very likely to lose.
Pacific Legal Foundation knows securing Americans’ rights means putting an end to unjust regulatory tribunals. Through litigation and legislative reform, PLF is fighting to return the adjudicative process to where it belongs: real, constitutional courts.
Jamie and Clyde Leach formed Leachco in 1988, a few months after their then-seven-month-old Alex nearly fell out of a restaurant highchair. Jamie designed a safety harness; then, over the years, she and her family invented a wide range of products for infants. One is the popular Podster infant lounger: a baby pillow. It comes with explicit instructions that it should only be used with babies who are awake and under adult supervision. But tragically, two babies died after the pillow was misused: one in a daycare crib and one in a co-sleeping arrangement. Now the Consumer Product Safety Commission is prosecuting the Leaches in an in-house tribunal where the deck is stacked against them. With PLF, the family filed a federal lawsuit, arguing the CPSC’s proceeding violates their right to a fair trial.
Executive branch agencies have the power to bring virtually anyone before their tribunals. Agencies that conduct in-house adjudication include, but are not limited to:
Agency tribunals don’t follow the same rules normal courts do. They don’t have neutral judges; they have Administrative Law Judges (ALJs), who work for the agency. There’s no jury. There aren’t fixed rules of evidence. If you want to appeal the decision, your appeal goes straight to the leadership of the agency prosecuting you. The process will likely take years. After the agency’s in-house judge and the agency have both ruled against you—and after you’ve spent time and money clawing your way through the administrative process—you’ll finally be allowed to appeal to a real court. But even then, you still won’t have a fair shot at justice, because real courts are required to defer to agencies.
If an agency thinks you’ve broken the law, it should make its case in a real court with an independent judge and a jury of your peers.
PLF represents individuals and businesses that find themselves targets of unfair agency prosecutions. Our clients have shown that no one has to play the agencies’ game—you can fight to change the entire system. Through our clients’ bravery, and by working alongside private counsel across the country, PLF is challenging the whole adjudicative process as unconstitutional.
(Photo to left: PLF attorneys and staff prepare for a hearing with the Consumer Product Safety Commission.)
Everyone has the right to due process—and legislators ensure their constituents have access to real courts, not sham administrative hearings.
Effective reform should restore fairness and due process when citizens are accused by regulatory agencies.
Are you facing an in-house tribunal with a regulatory agency? Submit your case to PLF and see if we can help you.
A maker of child care products is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide the constitutionality of protections barring the president from firing U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission members without…
Between the law and the nitty-gritty of its implementation stands the diabolical bureaucracy — without constitutional authority but with seemingly unquestionable powers to frame rules and regulation…
Today, the leading remedies for administrative enforcement actions are two types of pocketbook punishments—either civil money penalties or relief borrowed from the law of restitution. In 2022, the s…
A year has passed since the US Supreme Court opened the door to Americans trying to escape the federal government’s administrative tribunals. Yet real relief from agency proceedings remains elusive….
Just about every time a case involving the administrative state heads to the Supreme Court, we’re subjected to hysterical warnings of the end of the world.
SpaceX argues the federal agency trying to punish it for firing employees critical of Musk is itself unconstitutional.
Elon Musk and one of his companies are once again in the sights of federal regulators. This time, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) accused SpaceX of committing unfair labor practices by firing several employees who used company communication channels to circulate an open letter objecting to some of Musk’s tweets. But, in its pursuit …
Jamie Leach has dedicated her life to the pursuit of child safety. After receiving her Bachelor of Science degree in nursing, Jamie worked as a nurse in a pediatric intensive care unit in Ada, Oklahoma, where she lives. She later went on to combine her love of helping others with her natural proclivity toward innovation …
Sitting on the stone-cold floor and staring out of the bars of his cell in the Tower of London, Thomas Cromwell awaited his execution. Cromwell had faithfully served King Henry VIII for over a decade and had earned an earldom for helping the King with his infamous marital life. And yet, here he sat with …
PLF clients Tom and Amy Villegas have reason to celebrate after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) backed down from its outrageous claim that the couple violated the Clean Water Act (CWA). An oasis in Nebraska Tom and Amy Villegas love the outdoors. While the couple calls Colorado home, they have a deep connection with the …
To safeguard the American people against tyranny, the Framers of our Constitution created a political system with three distinct branches of government—executive, legislative, and judicial—each tasked with its own unique and specific powers. To ensure that no one branch could usurp the role of another, a system of checks and balances was instit …
As support swelled for America’s independence from England, an open question puzzled some hesitant colonists: Who will lead the new country? Thomas Paine had an answer: “In America, the law is king.” And so began a legal tradition like no other. Our written Constitution of limited and enumerated powers put forth a revolutionary idea: All …
Agencies at every level play an outsized role in everyday life. The FDA imposes nutritional guidelines; the FCC controls what viewers can see on TV. Many other alphabet-soup agencies regulate in many other areas of life. Thus, while many Americans think that it’s Congress that is regulating through legislation, it is usually the agency promul …
Kevin Brott wants a jury trial for his Fifth Amendment claim to just compensation. The federal government converted a portion of Brott’s property into a public trail. He wants a jury to gauge compensation rather than a judge who works for his adversary. Sadly, most takings claims against the federal government do not enjoy a jury. We fil …
