Lexplug logoLexplug

Dunlop v. Bachowski

Supreme Court of United States
421 U.S. 560 (1975)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

The Secretary of Labor's decision not to file a civil action to set aside a union election under the LMRDA is subject to judicial review, but the scope of that review is narrow and limited to determining whether the Secretary's decision, as explained in a required statement of reasons, is arbitrary, capricious, or otherwise contrary to law.


Facts:

  • Walter Bachowski was a candidate for District Director in an election held by the United Steelworkers of America (USWA).
  • Bachowski was defeated by the incumbent candidate.
  • After exhausting his internal remedies within the union, Bachowski filed a timely complaint with the Secretary of Labor.
  • The complaint alleged that violations of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA) had occurred during the election.
  • The Secretary investigated the complaint.
  • Following the investigation, the Secretary of Labor informed Bachowski by letter that a civil action to set aside the election was not warranted.

Procedural Posture:

  • Walter Bachowski filed suit against the Secretary of Labor in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, a federal trial court.
  • The District Court dismissed the suit, concluding it lacked the authority to review the Secretary's decision.
  • Bachowski, as appellant, appealed the dismissal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
  • The Court of Appeals, an intermediate appellate court, reversed the District Court, holding that the Secretary's decision was judicially reviewable and that the review could extend to the factual basis of the decision.
  • The Secretary of Labor, as petitioner, sought and was granted a writ of certiorari by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Is the Secretary of Labor's decision not to file a civil action to set aside a union election under the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA) subject to judicial review and, if so, what is the proper scope of that review?


Opinions:

Majority - Justice Brennan

Yes, the Secretary of Labor's decision not to file suit is subject to judicial review, but that review is narrowly limited. The LMRDA does not contain an express prohibition against judicial review, and the Secretary fails to provide the 'clear and convincing evidence' of congressional intent necessary to overcome the strong presumption that final agency actions are reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). However, the statutory objectives of the LMRDA—to utilize the Secretary's expertise, resolve election disputes quickly, and protect unions from frivolous litigation—require that the scope of review be narrow. Therefore, a full, trial-type inquiry into the factual basis for the Secretary's decision is impermissible. Instead, the review must be confined to determining whether the Secretary's decision was arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. To facilitate this limited review, the Secretary must provide the complaining union member and the court with a statement of reasons that explains the grounds for the decision and the essential facts upon which the Secretary's inferences are based.



Analysis:

This case establishes a significant check on prosecutorial discretion within administrative agencies, affirming the strong presumption of judicial review even for decisions not to take enforcement action. It strikes a balance between preventing unfettered agency power and respecting the expertise and statutory goals entrusted to the agency by Congress. The Court's creation of the 'statement of reasons' requirement provides a procedural mechanism for this limited review, ensuring agency accountability without allowing courts to substitute their own judgment for the agency's, a model that has influenced judicial review in other administrative contexts.

🤖 Gunnerbot:
Query Dunlop v. Bachowski (1975) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Dunlop v. Bachowski