|
|
Post by texasatty on Feb 21, 2008 10:29:47 GMT -5
Thanks Pixie, Workdrone. That's a relief. Permanency from day one. Now I only need a job offer.
|
|
|
|
Post by booboo on Feb 21, 2008 15:03:26 GMT -5
This little bear just read your post and I also hate to be picky, but Article I establishes the legislative branch that vests all such powers in Congress. Article II of the U.S. Constitution establishes the executive branch. So by that logic federal ALJ's who are employed by executive branch agencies (e.g., DOL, HHS, HUD, etc.) are Article II judges (even though administrative agencies are sometimes called the "fourth branch" of government). Hope that clarifies things. Boo Boo, Good logical reasoning, I got to remind myself to do some verification next time before typing from dusty recollections.  However, there's no such thing as an Article II judge. There are only Article I and Article III judges. Here's a link explaining the differences: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_I_and_Article_III_tribunalsI have modified my original post to reflect the correct info. Thanks!  Thanks, Work Drone ... I learned something new today! I always wondered about which category executive branch ALJs fell under given that Congress created the departments/agencies even though those departments/agencies fell under the executive branch. Article I it is. Thanks for the info! Boo Boo |
|
|
|
Post by emphyrio on Feb 21, 2008 15:55:09 GMT -5
This little bear just read your post and I also hate to be picky, but Article I establishes the legislative branch that vests all such powers in Congress. Article II of the U.S. Constitution establishes the executive branch. So by that logic federal ALJ's who are employed by executive branch agencies (e.g., DOL, HHS, HUD, etc.) are Article II judges (even though administrative agencies are sometimes called the "fourth branch" of government). Hope that clarifies things. Boo Boo, Good logical reasoning, I got to remind myself to do some verification next time before typing from dusty recollections. However, there's no such thing as an Article II judge. There are only Article I and Article III judges. Here's a link explaining the differences: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_I_and_Article_III_tribunalsI have modified my original post to reflect the correct info. Thanks! Along the same lines as "don't wear your black robe outside the office," I would be cautious about throwing around the claim that ALJ's are Article I judges. With all due deference to Wikipedia, there really is not a lot of authority supporting this point. I have a feeling that if an ALJ were to meet a real Article I judge and say, "Hi! I'm an Article I judge, just like you," the reception would be chilly. In my view, a judge whose rulings are reviewed by an administrative agency rather than other judges is not a "judge" within the meaning of either Article III or Article I. |
|
|
|
Post by shadow on Feb 21, 2008 16:03:41 GMT -5
". . . In my view, a judge whose rulings are reviewed by an administrative agency rather than other judges is not a "judge" within the meaning of either Article III or Article I."
ALJ decisions are reviewed by other judges, in U.S. district and circuit courts . Every once in awhile the cases even end up before the U.S. Supreme Court.
|
|
|
|
Post by odarite on Feb 21, 2008 18:01:13 GMT -5
I am not in the mood to do the research, but the United States Supreme Court has said that ALJs are judges, and if you can't take their word, then whose can you?
|
|
|
|
Post by extang on Feb 21, 2008 18:24:44 GMT -5
The formula that I think I remember from my administrative law class more than 30 years ago is that ALJs are officers of the executive branch who exercise quasi-judicial functions. We are purely and exclusively creatures of the Administrative Procedure Act, and nothing else (please remember Bishop Butler's maxim, "everything is what it is, and not another thing"). I doubt that that makes us Article I judges but have not really looked into or thought about it much.
|
|
|
|
Post by judicature on Feb 21, 2008 22:09:27 GMT -5
If you are really interested, you might look at the U.S. Supreme Court case about 23 years ago that declared the old Bankruptcy Act unconstitutional largely on the distinction between Article III and Article I judges.
|
|
cybear
Full Member
sic semper ursi
Posts: 57 
|
Post by cybear on Feb 21, 2008 23:46:36 GMT -5
Point well taken, Drone.
Indeed, I just checked the constitutions of the states where I am licensed and their judiciaries are enabled under local Articles IV, V and VIII, respectively. Nonetheless, if you were to ask any trial judge in those states from which article their power and jurisdiction is derived, I'd wager that they would assert to you that they are Article III judges... and lose.
|
|
However, there's no such thing as an Article II judge. There are only Article I and Article III judges. Here's a link explaining the differences:
