National Welfare Rights Organization v. F. David Mathews, Secretary of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• § 553’s requirement of “a concise general statement of . . . basis and purpose” takes on added meaning when rulemaking depends on the resolution of specific factual questions
• “[J]udicial review is meaningless where the administrative record is insufficient to determine whether the action is arbitrary and capricious.”
• “. . . the cardinal principle of AFDC is that only resources actually available may be counted in determining whether the recipient is within the state’s defínition of a standard of need.”
• \. . . the cardinal principle of AFDC is that only resources actually available may be counted in determining whether the recipient is within the state's definition of a standard of need. \
• regulations invalidated due to shortcomings of rulemaking procedures
• Aid to Families with Dependent Children

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).