United States v. Xuan Tam

Oral argument

• Argued

  17 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that Congress’s intent behind the words “public hearing” in section 3008 of the RCRA was ambiguous for Chevron purposes
• holding that formal rulemaking procedures prescribed by 5 U.S.C. §§ 556, 557 are required only when a statute mandates that rules be made \on the record\
• holding that formal rulemaking procedures prescribed by 5 U.S.C. §§ 556, 557 are required only when a statute mandates that rules be made “on the record”
• concluding that by according parties opportunity “to file statements of positions, submissions of evidence,” Interstate Commerce Commission satisfied statutory hearing requirement for its rate-making proceeding
• concluding that by according parties opportunity “to file statements of positions, submissions of evidence,” Interstate Commerce Commission satisfied statutory hearing requirement for its rate-making proceeding
• holding that \hearing\ under the Administrative Procedure Act requires that parties have fair notice of what agency intends to do and that parties have opportunity to comment; but \hearing\ does not require oral testimony, cross-examination, or oral argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).