Financial and regulatory expert Brent Skorup discusses penalties in non-courtroom adjudications. The podcast delves into the legal battle between Intuit and the FTC, contrasting judicial systems and exploring challenges faced by individuals and companies when dealing with administrative agencies. It also examines the implications of a potential Intuit victory on agency powers and the trend towards scrutinizing independent agencies' authority.
Recent Supreme Court actions show increased scrutiny on agency authority.
Challenges of in-house adjudications hinder companies' due process and lead to potential reevaluation of agency practices.
Deep dives
Scrutiny on Agency Authority
Courts have traditionally deferred to Congress and agencies' broad powers, but recent Supreme Court actions show increased scrutiny on agency authority. With the case of Intuit and the FTC, concerns about the agency's misuse of power surfaced when the FTC issued deceptive ad claims against Intuit. This highlights the shift towards reevaluating agency powers and the separation of powers principle.
Challenges with In-House Adjudications
Intuit's case exposes the challenges of in-house adjudications within agencies like the FTC. The process involving internal judges, lack of standard evidence rules, and agency bias create hurdles for companies like Intuit. Success for Intuit could lead to constraints on due process problems and overly broad authority granted to agencies by Congress, potentially prompting a reevaluation of agency practices and legislative delegation of powers.