Criticism of bureaucracy in the U S
🧠 First: What is Bureaucracy?
“Bureaucracy” refers to the administrative structure of the federal government — agencies like the EPA, IRS, FDA, and more.
These agencies make rules, enforce laws, adjudicate disputes — even though they are not directly elected.
Critics argue this gives too much power to unelected officials, threatening accountability, transparency, and separation of powers.
🔍 Major Criticisms of Bureaucracy in the U.S.
Lack of Democratic Accountability – Agencies are not elected, yet they make binding rules.
Excessive Rulemaking Power – Agencies can act like legislatures.
Judicial Deference to Agencies – Courts often defer to agency interpretation (Chevron doctrine).
Delegation of Legislative Power – Congress delegates too much to agencies.
Bureaucratic Inefficiency – Agencies are sometimes slow, duplicative, or contradictory.
Let’s now walk through case law where these concerns were raised and debated.
⚖️ Case Studies — Criticism of Bureaucracy via the Courts
1. Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984)
🔹 Issue: Should courts defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers?
🔹 Holding:
Yes — as long as:
The statute is ambiguous, and
The agency’s interpretation is reasonable.
🔹 Criticism:
Courts defer too much to agencies, allowing them to “fill in the blanks” of legislation.
Critics say this weakens judicial oversight and strengthens unaccountable bureaucracy.
🔹 Significance:
Chevron became the bedrock of administrative deference — but also a focal point of anti-bureaucratic criticism.
2. A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States (1935)
🔹 Issue: Was it constitutional for Congress to delegate power to the President (and agencies) to set labor and industrial codes?
🔹 Holding:
No — it was an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power.
🔹 Criticism:
The New Deal agencies were seen as overreaching.
This case shows early resistance to growing bureaucratic power.
🔹 Significance:
Key moment where the Supreme Court pushed back against executive agencies.
Demonstrates how unchecked delegation was seen as dangerous to liberty.
3. Free Enterprise Fund v. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (2010)
🔹 Issue: Could a board within the SEC (an agency within an agency) be insulated from presidential removal?
🔹 Holding:
No — the structure violated the Constitution’s separation of powers.
🔹 Criticism of Bureaucracy:
Too many layers of protection make agencies unaccountable to elected officials.
Bureaucracy becomes a “fourth branch of government.”
🔹 Significance:
Court limited how independent agencies can be.
Reinforced executive control over bureaucrats.
4. FDA v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. (2000)
🔹 Issue: Did the FDA have authority to regulate tobacco under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act?
🔹 Holding:
No — Congress hadn’t clearly granted that power.
🔹 Criticism of Bureaucracy:
Agencies shouldn’t assume sweeping powers without clear legislative approval.
Criticized for attempting to expand authority by reinterpretation.
🔹 Significance:
Shows courts will police agency overreach, especially when the agency acts without clear congressional support.
5. West Virginia v. EPA (2022)
🔹 Issue: Could the EPA issue rules that effectively reshape national energy policy under the Clean Air Act?
🔹 Holding:
No — this raised a “major questions” doctrine issue.
🔹 Criticism of Bureaucracy:
Agencies must have clear authorization from Congress for decisions of vast economic and political significance.
Bureaucracies are not meant to legislate on major issues.
🔹 Significance:
Landmark case for reining in bureaucratic power.
Courts signaled less deference in “major questions” scenarios.
6. Humphrey’s Executor v. United States (1935)
🔹 Issue: Could the President remove a commissioner from an independent agency at will?
🔹 Holding:
No — independent agencies like the FTC can have tenure protection.
🔹 Criticism of Bureaucracy:
Critics argue independent agencies escape executive oversight, creating unaccountable bureaucratic power.
🔹 Significance:
Still cited today to justify independent agency structures, though it’s being challenged by newer cases like Seila Law.
7. Seila Law LLC v. CFPB (2020)
🔹 Issue: Is the single-director structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau constitutional?
🔹 Holding:
No — it concentrates too much power in a single unaccountable official.
🔹 Criticism of Bureaucracy:
The Court rejected “bureaucratic independence” when it removes presidential control.
Seen as a check on runaway administrative power.
🔹 Significance:
New direction in limiting agency independence.
Emphasizes constitutional accountability.
🧾 Summary Table of Cases
| Case | Critique of Bureaucracy | Court's Response |
|---|---|---|
| Chevron (1984) | Excessive deference to agencies | Upheld deference (but now being questioned) |
| Schechter Poultry (1935) | Unconstitutional delegation | Struck down law; limited agency power |
| Free Enterprise Fund (2010) | Multi-layered insulation from oversight | Found structure unconstitutional |
| Brown & Williamson (2000) | Agency overreach into tobacco | Agency lacked clear authority |
| West Virginia v. EPA (2022) | Rulemaking on major questions | Required clear congressional authorization |
| Humphrey’s Executor (1935) | Agency independence from president | Upheld tenure protection |
| Seila Law (2020) | Too much power in one director | Struck down single-director independence |
🧠 Final Takeaways:
Judicial skepticism of bureaucracy is growing — especially when agencies:
Act without clear congressional guidance
Are insulated from presidential control
Make decisions with vast economic/political impact
Cases like Chevron and Humphrey’s Executor represent deference, but Seila Law and West Virginia v. EPA show reversal of that trend.
RELATED Blog
0 comments