Under Section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act, a federal court can vacate an agency rule it finds "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law." A rule fails this test when the agency ignores important factors, relies on factors Congress never told it to weigh, gives an explanation that runs counter to the evidence, or is so implausible it cannot reflect genuine expertise. The standard forces agencies to show their work, and it is the most common ground on which courts overturn regulations.
This standard is one of the main ways courts police agency power. If an agency cannot connect its rule to the facts and the statute, judges can block the policy before it reshapes real lives.
People often hear this phrase as a synonym for bad policy. It is narrower than that. A court asks whether the agency reasoned through the record, not whether the judge likes the outcome.
This standard is one of the main ways courts police agency power. If an agency cannot connect its rule to the facts and the statute, judges can block the policy before it reshapes real lives.
People often hear this phrase as a synonym for bad policy. It is narrower than that. A court asks whether the agency reasoned through the record, not whether the judge likes the outcome.