英语翻译Despite the problems associated with judicial review of administrative agencies,supporters of judicial review in administrative law argue in favor of it.First,supporters argue that public administrators are just as susceptible to abuse of

英语翻译Despite the problems associated with judicial review of administrative agencies,supporters of judicial review in administrative law argue in favor of it.First,supporters argue that public administrators are just as susceptible to abuse of
英语翻译
Despite the problems associated with judicial review of administrative agencies,supporters of judicial review in administrative law argue in favor of it.First,supporters argue that public administrators are just as susceptible to abuse of discretion as any other public official.Indeed,because most administrators are not elected,the potential for abuse of discretion may be even greater.The courts should serve as checks on public administrators to guard against arbitrary and capricious actions.Second,supporters of judicial review argue that an administrative agency is frequently “captured” by the agency’s clientele group.Capture occurs when an agency begins to place the interests of the regulated industry above the public interest.Critics of the now defunct Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) complained that airfares were set more to guarantee the airlines a profit than to keep the consumer’s traveling costs down.In light of such charges,supporters of judicial review argue that judicial intervention may be necessary to protect the public interest.Finally,supporters of judicial review argue that bureaucrats tend to see problems form a narrow perspective,while judges tend to see the “big picture”.In Goldberg,for example,Justice Brennan’s opinion tended to stress the bigger picture of the role of welfare in our society,whereas a welfare worker might see only that the decision will increase the number of termination hearings for the agency.In the rest of this section we will examine some of the limits of judicial review in administrative law.
Preclusion of judicial review.There are some areas in which the courts are precluded from reviewing the decisions of administrative agencies.Congress,for whatever reasons,has chosen to take the review of some administrative decisions out of the jurisdiction of the courts.One such area is veterans’ benefits,an “especially fertile ground for preclusion controversies”.Consider the preclusion language of this statute concerning veterans’ benefits that was considered in Wellman v.Whittier:

英语翻译Despite the problems associated with judicial review of administrative agencies,supporters of judicial review in administrative law argue in favor of it.First,supporters argue that public administrators are just as susceptible to abuse of
尽管相关的问题与司法审查的行政机构,支持者的司法审查在行政法中辩称,在赞成.首先,支持者认为,公共管理者一样容易滥用裁量权的任何其他公职人员.事实上,因为大部份的管理员是不是选举产生的,潜在的滥用裁量权可能更大.法院应充当检查,对公共管理者,以防止任意和反复无常的行动.第二,支持者的司法复核认为,行政机构经常“捕获”了该机构的客户组.捕捉发生时,一开始机构的利益置于对所辖行业的上述公众利益.批评现已解散的民用航空委员会（ CAB ）的抱怨说,票价订定更,以保证航空公司的利润比把消费者的旅行费用.在根据这些收费,支持者的司法复核认为,司法干预可能是必要的,以保障公众利益.最后,支持者的司法复核认为,官僚往往看到的问题,形成一个狭窄的角度来看,而法官往往见“大图片” .在戈德堡,例如,司法布伦南的意见,往往强调更大的图片的作用,福利在我们的社会,而福利工作可能只看到这个决定将增加的人数终止听证机构.在其余的本节中,我们将研究的一些限制司法审查在行政法中.
排除司法审查.也有一些在哪些领域,法院是排除审查的决定,行政机关.国会,无论基于什么原因,选择了采取检讨的一些行政决定走出法院的司法管辖权.其中一个领域是退伍军人的利益,“特别是肥沃的土壤,为排除争议” .考虑排除语言本规约的有关退伍军人的福利被认为是在威尔曼五whittier ：
- -!谷歌翻译的.将就理解下先