The relevant law is the Administrative Procedures Act [1], which this court found “provides that courts must ‘hold unlawful and set aside agency action’ that is ‘in
excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right’; ‘arbitrary’ or
‘capricious’; or ‘otherwise not in accordance with law.’ U.S.C. § 706(2).”
Court order: https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mad.286...
The relevant law is the Administrative Procedures Act [1], which this court found “provides that courts must ‘hold unlawful and set aside agency action’ that is ‘in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right’; ‘arbitrary’ or ‘capricious’; or ‘otherwise not in accordance with law.’ U.S.C. § 706(2).”
(There are also issues under the FACA [2].)
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedure_Act
[2] https://www.gsa.gov/policy-regulations/policy/federal-adviso...
'Arbitrary’ and ‘capricious’ is a central component of this administration.
Do rulings like this actually have any effect, or will the administration just ignore it?
https://archive.fo/fCFJa