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.
Hollywood is an unexpected place to find a trenchant critique of the administrative state, yet “Oppenheimer” is just that.
“A wild new court decision [that] would blow up much of the government’s ability to operate.” That’s how Vox’s Ian Millhiser characterizes the U.S. Fifth Circuit’s decision in Jarkesy v. S…
Some federal regulator or another thinks you’ve broken the law. What happens next? You might think that they file charges in a federal court and the judicial system takes over to determine whether y…
Any discussion today of constitutional protections for liberty typically focuses on the Bill of Rights. That makes sense, because affirmative protections for our rights play an essential role in keepi…
On April 14, the US Supreme Court unanimously handed a loss on a silver platter to the administrative state. In Cochran v. SEC and Axon Enterprise, Inc. v. FTC, the court concluded the executive adjud…
Every year, millions of kids wake up on Christmas to find that jolly old St. Nick has rendered his verdict on their performance over the past 12 months. Most think of Christmas morning as a time of jo…
The in-house courts of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are not just at odds with the separation of powers, they also don’t serve their alleged purpose of efficient justice.
Justice delayed is justice denied — or so the old saying goes. And although swimming in complex factual and legal issues, two cases that will be argued at the Supreme Court on Monday will put that a…
The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has set its sights on a small company in Oklahoma. Despite an excellent safety record by Leachco Inc., the CPSC claims its infant-lounging pillow is a saf…
It often starts with a knock. Someone comes to the front door holding papers—legal documents—and hands them over. You’re being sued. Even so, you can draw some comfort from the fact that the U.S…
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 …
