Also known as: paths may reasonably be discerned · clearly established right · qualified immunity
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A standard of judicial review under which courts uphold an agency's decision even if its explanation lacks ideal clarity, provided the agency's reasoning can be reasonably understood from the record.
Deputy Director Harlan issued internal guidance restricting Ridge Equity accounts as part of a national-security directive. The agency record showed the restrictions responded to foreign wire-transfer threats but omitted formal findings on domestic due-process impacts. A reviewing court upheld the action because the agency's path from presidential directive to account restrictions could reasonably be discerned.
The agency rescinded a passive-restraint requirement after considering public comments and safety data. Its explanation omitted an explicit weighing of each alternative yet referenced the same studies later cited in the final order. A court sustained the rescission because the agency's path from comment review to policy reversal could reasonably be discerned.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
The Department of Defense issued a memorandum classifying certain detainees as enemy combatants without a detailed hearing record. The memorandum referenced presidential directives and intelligence summaries that appeared elsewhere in the administrative file. A court upheld the classification because the agency's path from intelligence to enemy-combatant designation could reasonably be discerned.
School officials adopted a strip-search policy after receiving reports of prescription-drug distribution. The policy statement listed the reports but did not articulate why less intrusive measures were rejected. A court sustained the policy because the agency's path from incident reports to search protocol could reasonably be discerned.
A county sheriff's department revised its high-speed pursuit guidelines after reviewing accident statistics and officer training records. The guidelines omitted an explicit cost-benefit analysis yet referenced the same data sets used in prior internal memoranda. A court upheld the revision because the agency's path from statistics to guideline changes could reasonably be discerned.
The Department of Commerce added a citizenship question to the census form after internal deliberations on enforcement needs. The administrative record contained memoranda linking the question to voting-rights enforcement but did not restate every enforcement rationale. A court upheld the addition because the agency's path from enforcement goals to form revision could reasonably be discerned.
A court applies the standard when an agency's explanation is less than ideal yet its reasoning can still be traced through the administrative record. Remand is unnecessary if the path from facts considered to decision reached is reasonably apparent.
Supporting sources
No. The standard permits review of imperfect explanations but still requires that the agency's reasoning appear in the record. Post-hoc rationalizations supplied only in litigation do not satisfy the requirement.
Supporting sources
The standard operates within arbitrary-and-capricious review. It allows a court to uphold a decision whose reasoning is discernible even if the agency's writing is not a model of clarity, provided the decision is otherwise supported by the record.
Supporting sources
…immunity from damages liability. In Pierson v. Ray , 386 U. S. 547 (1967), we recognized that police officers are entitled to a qualified immunity. But the qualified immunity recognized in Pierson and Scheuer is available only to officials performing discretionary functions. The federal agents here are not entitled to such…