Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
1
Chapter 43
Administrative Law and Regulatory Agencies
VI. Answers to Critical Legal Thinking Cases
43.1 Government Regulation
Yes, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) regulation and censoring of Pacifica Foundation
(Pacifica) in this case was lawful and constitutional. The U.S. Supreme Court held that Congress had
asserted the Federal Communications Act, which specifically forbids the use of any “obscene, indecent,
or profane language by means of radio communications.” The Supreme Court held that the FCC did not
exceed its delegated power when it found George Carlin’s “Filthy Words” monologue to be indecent and
thereby not proper to be broadcast by a radio station. The Supreme Court also addressed the First
Amendment Freedom of Speech issue that was raised by Pacifica. The court held that all forms of
communication broadcasting have the most limited First Amendment protection. The court stated that
43.2 Administrative Search
Yes, the warrantless searches of stone quarries authorized by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act are
constitutional. The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects persons and businesses from
unreasonable searches. Inspections of commercial property may be unreasonable if they are not
aware that the mining industry is among the most hazardous in the country and that the poor health and
safety record of this industry has significant deleterious effects on interstate commerce. The Supreme
Court stated that in designing an inspection program, Congress expressly recognized that a warrant
requirement could be effectively frustrated by the notorious ease with which many safety and health
States).
2
VII. Answer to Ethics Case
43.3 Ethics Case
Supreme Court stated that a fair trial in a fair tribunal is a basic requirement of due process. This applies
to administrative agencies that adjudicate as well as to the courts. In pursuit of this end, various situations
have been identified in which experience teaches that the probability of actual bias on the part of the
judge or decision maker is too high to be constitutionally tolerable; for example, where the judge has a
much risk of actual bias or prejudgment that the practice must be forbidden if the guarantee of due
process is to be adequately implemented.
The Supreme Court held that it is not a violation of procedural due process for an administrative agency
to possess and use investigative adjudicative powers concerning the same matter. The only requirement is
