“Arbitrary and capricious” is a legal term used to describe government actions that are unreasonable, without a rational basis, or inconsistent with established legal principles. It is often used in the context of administrative law, where courts review the actions of government agencies to ensure that they are not arbitrary or capricious. To determine if an action is arbitrary or capricious, courts consider factors such as whether the agency provided a reasoned explanation for its decision, whether it considered all relevant evidence, and whether its decision was based on a misapplication of law.
Arbitrary and Capricious Definition
The term “arbitrary and capricious” is a legal standard used in administrative law to review the decisions of government agencies. It means that the agency’s decision must be based on a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made. In other words, the agency cannot make a decision that is based on whim or personal preference.
Key Elements of Arbitrary and Capricious Review
To determine whether an agency’s decision is arbitrary and capricious, a court will consider the following factors:
- Whether the agency’s findings of fact are supported by substantial evidence. This means that the evidence must be more than just a scintilla (i.e., a small amount) and must be such that a reasonable person could reach the same conclusion as the agency.
- Whether the agency’s conclusions of law are rational. This means that the agency’s conclusions must be based on a sound legal basis.
- Whether the agency’s decision-making process was fair and impartial. This means that the agency must have given all interested parties an opportunity to participate in the decision-making process and must have considered all relevant evidence.
Examples of Arbitrary and Capricious Decisions
The following are examples of agency decisions that have been found to be arbitrary and capricious:
- An agency decision to deny a permit without providing any explanation for the denial
- An agency decision to approve a project without considering the environmental impact of the project
- An agency decision to terminate an employee without giving the employee an opportunity to defend himself or herself
Consequences of Arbitrary and Capricious Decisions
If a court finds that an agency’s decision is arbitrary and capricious, it may overturn the decision and remand it to the agency for further proceedings. The court may also require the agency to pay the costs and attorney’s fees of the party who challenged the decision.
Table: Differences Between Arbitrary and Capricious and Rational Basis Review
The following table summarizes the key differences between arbitrary and capricious review and rational basis review:
| Standard of Review | Burden of Proof | Evidence Required | Outcome if Standard Not Met |
|---|---|---|---|
| Arbitrary and Capricious | Plaintiff must show that the agency’s decision was not based on a rational connection between the facts found and the choice made | Substantial evidence | Decision is overturned and remanded to the agency |
| Rational Basis | Plaintiff must show that the agency’s decision was not rationally related to a legitimate government interest | Any evidence | Decision is upheld |
Question 1: What is the definition of “arbitrary and capricious”?
Answer: Arbitrary and capricious is a legal term used to describe a government action that is not based on a rational connection between the facts found and the decision made, or an action that is not based on relevant factors or is taken without taking into account the relevant factors.
Question 2: How is the “arbitrary and capricious” standard different from the “rational basis” standard?
Answer: The arbitrary and capricious standard is more stringent than the rational basis standard. Under the rational basis standard, a government action will be upheld if it has a rational basis in fact, even if it is not the best or most reasonable decision. Under the arbitrary and capricious standard, however, a government action will be overturned if it is found to be arbitrary or capricious, even if it has a rational basis in fact.
Question 3: What are some examples of government actions that have been found to be arbitrary and capricious?
Answer: Government actions that have been found to be arbitrary and capricious include: (1) actions that are not based on a rational connection between the facts found and the decision made; (2) actions that are not based on relevant factors or are taken without taking into account the relevant factors; (3) actions that are taken in bad faith; (4) actions that are based on a clear and prejudicial error; and (5) actions that are an abuse of discretion.
Well folks, that’s all for today’s little dive into the wacky world of “arbitrary and capricious” definitions. I hope you enjoyed the ride as much as I did. Remember, language is a funny thing, and sometimes it can be as unpredictable as a bag of kittens. But hey, that’s what makes it so darn fun! Thanks for sticking with me on this linguistic adventure. Be sure to drop by again soon for more linguistic shenanigans. Until then, keep your eyes peeled for those slippery words that like to play hide-and-seek with their meanings. Cheers!