Quasi-Legislative Powers: Rulemaking, Scope, and Review

Explore the rulemaking processes, scope, and review mechanisms of quasi-legislative powers granted to administrative agencies for effective implementation and enforcement of legislative mandates.


Quasi-legislative powers refer to the authority granted to administrative agencies to create rules and regulations that have the force of law. These powers are essential for the effective functioning of the executive branch, enabling it to implement and enforce legislative mandates. This article explores the concept of quasi-legislative powers, focusing on rulemaking processes, the scope of these powers, and the mechanisms for reviewing agency rules.

Rulemaking Process

Definition and Importance

Rulemaking is the process by which administrative agencies create, modify, or repeal rules and regulations. These rules have the same legal effect as laws passed by the legislature and are crucial for the detailed implementation of legislative policies.

Types of Rulemaking

Informal Rulemaking

Informal rulemaking, also known as "notice-and-comment" rulemaking, is the most common form of rulemaking. It involves the following steps:

  1. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM): The agency publishes a notice in the Federal Register, outlining the proposed rule and inviting public comments.
  2. Public Comment Period: Stakeholders, including individuals, businesses, and other entities, submit comments on the proposed rule.
  3. Final Rule: After considering the public comments, the agency publishes the final rule in the Federal Register.

For more detailed information, refer to the Federal Register's Guide to the Rulemaking Process.

Formal Rulemaking

Formal rulemaking is less common and involves a trial-like hearing process. It is required when statutes explicitly mandate it. The steps include:

  1. Notice of Hearing: The agency publishes a notice of the hearing in the Federal Register.
  2. Hearing: An administrative law judge conducts the hearing, where evidence is presented, and witnesses may be cross-examined.
  3. Final Rule: Based on the hearing record, the agency issues the final rule.

Hybrid Rulemaking

Hybrid rulemaking combines elements of both informal and formal rulemaking. It may include additional procedural requirements, such as public hearings or advisory committee consultations, beyond the standard notice-and-comment process.

Exemptions from Rulemaking Requirements

Certain rules are exempt from the notice-and-comment requirements, including:

  1. Interpretative Rules: These clarify existing laws or regulations without creating new legal obligations.
  2. General Statements of Policy: These provide guidance on how the agency intends to exercise its discretionary powers.
  3. Procedural Rules: These govern the agency's internal operations and do not affect the rights or obligations of external parties.

Participation in Rulemaking

Public participation is a cornerstone of the rulemaking process. Agencies encourage stakeholders to provide input, ensuring that diverse perspectives are considered. For guidance on participating in the rulemaking process, see How to Participate in the Rulemaking Process - CA.gov.

Scope of Quasi-Legislative Powers

Delegation of Authority

The delegation of quasi-legislative powers to administrative agencies is grounded in the need for expertise and efficiency in implementing complex legislative policies. Congress delegates these powers through enabling statutes, which outline the scope and limits of the agency's authority.

Standards and Guidelines

Enabling statutes often include standards and guidelines to direct the agency's rulemaking activities. These may specify:

  1. Objectives: The goals the agency should achieve through its rules.
  2. Criteria: The factors the agency must consider when creating rules.
  3. Procedures: The processes the agency must follow in rulemaking.

Judicial Interpretation

Courts play a crucial role in interpreting the scope of quasi-legislative powers. They ensure that agencies do not exceed their delegated authority and that their rules comply with statutory mandates. Key judicial doctrines include:

  1. Chevron Deference: Courts defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of ambiguous statutory provisions.
  2. Auer Deference: Courts defer to an agency's interpretation of its own regulations unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation.

For an in-depth discussion on congressional oversight and judicial review, refer to Congress's Authority to Influence and Control Executive Branch.

Review of Agency Rules

Administrative Review

Administrative review involves internal agency procedures for reviewing and revising rules. Agencies may establish review boards or panels to assess the effectiveness and compliance of their rules.

Judicial Review

Judicial review is a critical mechanism for ensuring the legality and constitutionality of agency rules. Courts review agency rules under the following standards:

  1. Arbitrary and Capricious Standard: Courts assess whether the agency's decision-making process was rational and based on relevant factors.
  2. Substantial Evidence Standard: Courts evaluate whether the agency's rule is supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record.
  3. Ultra Vires Doctrine: Courts determine whether the agency acted beyond its statutory authority.

Congressional Review

Congress has the authority to review and overturn agency rules through the Congressional Review Act (CRA). Under the CRA, Congress can pass a joint resolution of disapproval to nullify a rule. For more information, see Options for Enhancing Congressional Oversight of Rulemaking.

Executive Review

The executive branch, through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), reviews significant agency rules to ensure they align with the President's policy objectives. Executive Order 12866 outlines the principles and procedures for regulatory review. For further details, refer to Extending Regulatory Review Under Executive Order 12866.


Quasi-legislative powers are essential for the effective functioning of administrative agencies, enabling them to create rules and regulations that implement legislative policies. The rulemaking process, scope of authority, and review mechanisms ensure that agency rules are created transparently, within legal bounds, and subject to oversight. Understanding these aspects is crucial for stakeholders, policymakers, and the public to engage effectively in the regulatory process and uphold the principles of administrative law.


  1. The Administrative Rules Promulgation Process: A Primer - My LRC
  2. Congress's Authority to Influence and Control Executive Branch
  3. How to Participate in the Rulemaking Process - CA.gov
  4. A Guide to the Rulemaking Process - Federal Register
  5. Options for Enhancing Congressional Oversight of Rulemaking
  6. Extending Regulatory Review Under Executive Order 12866

This comprehensive guide aims to provide a detailed understanding of quasi-legislative powers, their scope, and the review mechanisms in place to ensure their proper exercise. By adhering to these principles, administrative agencies can effectively implement legislative policies while maintaining transparency, accountability, and public trust.

About the author
Von Wooding

Von Wooding

Helpful legal information and resources

Counsel Stack Learn

Free and helpful legal information

Counsel Stack Learn

Great! You’ve successfully signed up.

Welcome back! You've successfully signed in.

You've successfully subscribed to Counsel Stack Learn.

Success! Check your email for magic link to sign-in.

Success! Your billing info has been updated.

Your billing was not updated.