Rehaif v. United States
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Rehaif v. United States and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Rehaif v. United States.
The Supreme Court vacated and remanded the decision of the Court of Appeals regarding whether an FCC order is binding on lower courts. The Court identified two preliminary questions: whether the order is a legislative or interpretive rule, and whether PDR had a prior and adequate opportunity for judicial review. These issues were not addressed by the Court of Appeals and require further consideration.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Rehaif v. United States.
The Court held that the judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded for further consideration of preliminary issues.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Rehaif v. United States. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Administrative Law is relevant to Rehaif v. United States
The case involves determining whether an FCC order is binding on lower courts, which relates to the constitutional limits on agency authority.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)The extent to which the 2006 FCC order binds the lower courts may depend on the resolution of two preliminary sets of questions that were not aired before the Court of Appeals.
-
Why Judicial Review is relevant to Rehaif v. United States
The case concerns whether the Administrative Procedure Act allows for judicial review of an FCC order in an enforcement proceeding.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)If the Hobbs Act's exclusive-review provision...did not afford PDR a 'prior' and 'adequate' opportunity for judicial review, it may be that the Administrative Procedure Act permits PDR to challenge the order's validity in this enforcement proceeding.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Rehaif v. United States
The case involves questions about whether PDR had a 'prior' and 'adequate' opportunity for judicial review, implicating fair procedures.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Second, did PDR have a 'prior' and 'adequate' opportunity to seek judicial review of the order?
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Rehaif v. United States that support the summary and concepts above.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated, and the case is remanded for that court to consider these preliminary issues.
If the order is the equivalent of an 'interpretive rule,' it may not be binding on a district court.
Did PDR have a 'prior' and 'adequate' opportunity to seek judicial review of the order?
