In response to outbreaks of mad cow disease, the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department
Question:
In response to outbreaks of mad cow disease, the Food and Drug Administration and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) implemented a number of regulations to protect American consumers and cattle herds. Chief among them was a regulation banning cattle imports from countries in which mad cow disease was known to exist. Shortly after the ban went into effect, the USDA partially reversed course and published a proposed rule allowing certain low-risk products into the United States. During the comment period, some groups objected to the proposed rule due to evidence of potential contamination even in low-risk products.
The agency then published its final rule, which modified existing regulations to allow the import of lowrisk products. The Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America challenged the agency’s decision to allow low-risk products as arbitrary and capricious even though the agency had held several comment periods.
CASE QUESTIONS
1. Is the decision arbitrary and capricious? Why or why not?
2. Does the fact that the agency held several comment periods impact your analysis?
Step by Step Answer:
Determining whether a decision is arbitrary and capricious involves assessing whether the decisionmaking process was rational based on relevant factors and supported by substantial evidence In this case the decision by the USDA to allow the import of lowrisk products despite the ban on cattle imports from countries with mad cow disease raises the question of whether the decision was reasonable and supported by adequate justification The fact that the agency had held several comment periods suggests that it sought input from stakeholders and considered various perspectives before making the final decision This indicates a level of transparency and engagement with the public which is generally seen as a positive aspect of the decisionmaking process However the critical factor in determining whether the decision is arbitrary and capricious revolves around whether the agency adequately addressed the concerns raised during the comment periods and whether there is substantial evidence to support the conclusion that allowing lowrisk products posed minimal risk to American consumers and cattle herds If the agencys decision is wellsupported by scientific evidence risk assessments and a thorough consideration of the comments it would be less likely to be considered arbitrary and capricious 2 Yes the fact that the agency held several comment periods is an important factor ...View the full answer
The Legal Environment Of Business A Managerial Approach Theory To Practice
ISBN: 9781260247800
4th Edition
Authors: Sean Melvin, Enrique Guerra-Pujol
