Are Administrative Law Judges Unconstitutional?

In a few weeks, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Lucia v. Securities and Exchange Commission, a case with important implications for administering government in an accountable manner. Federal agencies wield enormous power over the lives of Americans in many respects. Instead of bringing enforcement actions against individuals or businesses in federal court, agencies often opt to commence proceedings where in-house judges preside. These administrative law judges or “ALJs” make up what is sometimes called the “hidden judiciary.” They adjudicate claims, decide what evidence is admissible, and enforce penalties and compliance. Some believe ALJs are well-suited to handle these proceedings efficiently, but others believe ALJs suffer from a lack of independence because they work for the agency that initiated the proceedings. In a few weeks, the Supreme Court will decide whether they are unconstitutional. The Court will consider whether ALJs are “Officers of the United States” within the meaning of the Constitution’s Appointments Clause. Why is this a big deal? What does this mean for government accountability? And what effect might this have on thousands of enforcement actions? Please join us as an expert panel discusses this important case.

[lawrencemiller]

We need a regulatory body which charge elected & appointed officials with crimes when they create or propose unconstitutional laws.

[lawrencemiller]

A better question is, Do you want bureaucrats acting as the legislative body, the executive body, and the judicial body? No.

A related question is, Do you want congress to delegate its job to write laws, for example, have bureaucrats writing regulations? No.

[tajaicalip]

The Clerk and Judge at the Renee C. Davidson Court knows about acknowledging Hearing Officers orders. What type of Judge steps in after claiming that they can without any jurisdiction because they have egos and too much pride and wants the Hearing Officer to lie on me. The Hearing Officer office has clearly spoken that the Halliday's should have addressed the water pipe. If the Halliday's was told that they should have addressed the water pipe. What Judge tells me the Halliday's do not have to have any proof and bring strangers in my home. The Police, Sheriff, DA, County Attorney, Judge, City Attorney, and FBI had the audacity to think that I am supposed to allow trespassers to then cover-up the water damage with paint trying to make it appear the work was completed. What Police, DA, and Judge will purposely leave the trespassers in the home to tamper with my evidence and not be charged? There are arrests in ALL these professions in cities and states but oakland misfits of society feel that they should get special treatment and be able to lie on me. I want to know why no one has been charged for these multiple crimes with the assistance of the Police, DA, City Attorney, County Attorney, City Council, Mayor, FBI, and Sheriffs.

[tajaicalip]

Why is the Executive Branch not being forced to enforced the laws in cases where the evidence has been spoken?

[tajaicalip]

Even if a judge decides to take the position of a Hearing Officer without evidence. The judge cannot rule in the opposing side favor. If there is a work order that was agreed by all parties to be completed and signed. A judge does not tell either of us that we cannot have a work order. The Judge does not go to homes and Inspect work being completed. The Inspector does. If the Inspector saw the water damage. The opposing side knew they had to address the work. If they decide to not address the work order. I can start asking for money for being inconvenienced out of my home. The judge does not say that because the opposing side did not complete the work order. I am to be incarcerated and accused of things that I am not connected to. The judge does not say let the people who illegally entered my home be the experts and say whether or not the work was completed by allowing the trespassers to paint over the water damage in the middle of my case. No judge has that power.

[valuedcustomer]

When the judge ask your name:  Say;  I am here to deal with that matter, I live on a common-law land and I require of you to put a man on the stand to verify these charges, who do I owe?    You are charged with XX209-1 how do you plea?  I am not here to plea to that garbage you call a code, I know of no law that requires I to decipher your secret code, why is the injured party not standing by the prosecutor, I know there has to be an injured party or you have no jurisdiction, who is he? What man brings these charges?     The State of XXX is charging you.     Where is the State of XXX I do not see him?   [The judge will point to the prosecutor]  Ask him "are toy the State of XXX?   Yes I am.   I will need to see some I.D. to prove you are who you say you are!   I mean I represent the State of XXX.     So you lie do you, I have a right to meet my accuser when did you talk to this Mr./Mrs. Stateof xxx last and what did he say to you?  You do have a signed statement from Mr. State don't you?        Ask the  Man in black; I require leave of court.  How long do you need?  I require  till the State of XXX can appear, when will this be?

[JaySinor-lq]

To protect the agencies just like he said not the constitutional rights but the agencies

[r.goingfishing]

Ssa disability judge, decides what evidence is used, weight given to doctors notes and records, judges also decide that if they use a medical record to help your claim, the written statement can be just that, I counted some 14 times the judge used from 4 doc I was in remission, yes I agree with that medical evidence, medical evidence is one thing, and physical medical evidence is another, so is mental, but they all run together, meaning the judge wears 3 hats, do the alj uphold fed law rulings, if you ever get disabled and have 30 work credits, and judges says u have no work history, you tell me???they have the power nothing u can do

[joycebenton]

I believe the principles of the laws, because usually in any civilized country of the laws, they don’t divide peoples from races, genders and between the rich and poor, but divide by rules of the laws only. This is why our country should lead and govern by rules of the laws as Constitution and Americans of all should live and build our country altogether by our country’s own established principles of the rules of the laws too. So America will continue be a in order society by America’s principles of patriotism and loyalty and freedom and equality of opportunities always and forever altogether.

[kuumbafranklacy]

To even ASK THIS QUESTION is i would answer....YES

[joycebenton]

Actually, the powers are the duty for America’s own established principles as well as for own citizens’ wills and privilege of freedoms and equality of the opportunities of Americans of all. Laws are the principles by frame of concept of definitions, so does the powers should stand strongly and firmly for the principles of the definition of the concept too. Let’s learn all together about this again to do correct things only in our civilized society America.

[FredNewsome]

is family court administrative judicial action.

[JaySinor-lq]

It's a word game and that's why you didn't indulge in too much because you know if you say too much we the people will stand the and use it against you

[bigjohn]

Are there any statutes that say they are unconstitutional?