Abstract
The law governing ultra vires review seeking injunctive relief to challenge statutory violations by federal agencies is a mess. Although administrative law generally limits judicial review to final actions, a substantial body of caselaw holds that this type of ultra vires review can reach interlocutory actions, vastly expanding judicial reach. Although administrative law now insists that federal courts must exercise independent judgment when reviewing agency statutory interpretations, caselaw limits this type of ultra vires review to correcting only the most spectacular statutory violations. In addition, caselaw ignores or garbles the problem of determining which types of plaintiffs qualify to invoke a cause of action for ultra vires review. Ultra vires review for injunctive relief to challenge statutory violations would make more sense if courts thought about it the same way they did back in 1946 when the Administrative Procedure Act was enacted. Under the well-understood framework of that time, a plaintiff could seek injunctive relief to redress a “legal wrong” caused by a “final” agency action in a suit in which the court could exercise independent judgment over issues of law. Students of administrative law will find this framework familiar because Congress basically codified it in the APA. By the transitive postulate, this Article’s proposal boils down to the idea that ultra vires review should work much like APA review did back in 1946. The confusion that burdens ultra vires review would largely disappear if courts remembered this basic equivalence.
DOI
https://doi.org/10.63140/t43jrk9zxv
Recommended Citation
Richard W. Murphy, Ultra Vires Review of Federal Agency Action Made Simple(r) Ultra Vires Review of Federal Agency Action Made Simple(r) 2025 ULR 1201 (2025).