1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Government Urges SCOTUS to Declare ALJ Process Unconstitutional

Government Urges SCOTUS to Declare ALJ Process Unconstitutional

Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.08.17

On November 29, 2017, the United States filed a brief in support of certiorari in Raymond J. Lucia Cos., Inc. v. SEC, urging the U.S. Supreme Court to use the case to hold that the existing hiring process for federal administrative law judges (ALJs) is unconstitutional. To date, federal courts of appeals have split on the question: the D.C. Circuit ruled that ALJs are mere “employees” of the federal government and are properly hired through a competitive process overseen by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM); the Tenth and Fifth Circuits, on the other hand, ruled that ALJs are “inferior officers” of the United State and must therefore be appointed as dictated by the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution, as previously discussed here and here. The answer to the question could have significant consequences for thousands of ALJs serving in dozens of federal agencies who are routinely charged with overseeing discovery in agency proceedings, issuing subpoenas, making findings of fact, and deciding cases. The Supreme Court should decide whether to accept the case for argument early next year.

Insights

Client Alert | 4 min read | 10.30.26

Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right: GAO Sustains Protest Where Agency Tried to Fix PIA Violation with a Second PIA Violation

Recent sustain decisions by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC and Reliance Test & Technology send a clear message: when an agency tries to fix a Procurement Integrity Act (PIA) violation by committing a second one, the cure can be just as fatal as the disease. The cases involved the U.S. Air Force’s $1.8 billion procurement for O&M services at Elgin Air Force Base. During discussions, the Air Force inadvertently released a pricing overview slide with all offerors’ bottom-line evaluated costs to Reliance Test & Technology, which immediately notified the agency of the error. In response, the Air Force decided to level the playing field by providing the same information to all the other offerors in the procurement, stating, “[o]fferors may consider this disclosure in their [final proposal revision].”...