An administrative law judge (ALJ) in the United States is an official who presides at an administrative trial-type hearing to resolve a dispute between a government agency and someone affected by a decision of that agency. The ALJ is the initial trier of fact and decision maker. ALJ's can administer oaths, take testimony, rule on questions of evidence, and make factual and legal determinations.[1] The proceeding involved with the ALJ may be similar to a summary judgment.
Procedure for reviewing an ALJ's decision varies depending upon the agency. Agencies generally have an internal appellate body, with some agencies having a Cabinet secretary deciding the final internal appeals. Moreover, after the internal agency appeals have been exhausted, a party may have the right to file an appeal in the courts. Relevant statutes usually require a party to exhaust all administrative appeals before they are allowed to sue an agency in court.
Federal ALJ's are appointed under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Their appointments are non-political and based on scores achieved in a comprehensive testing procedure. Federal ALJs are the only merit-based judicial corps in the United States.
The APA is designed to guarantee the independence of ALJs. They have absolute immunity from liability for their judicial acts and are triers of fact "insulated from political influence." Federal administrative law judges are not responsible to, or subject to the supervision or direction of employees or agents of the federal agency engaged in the performance of investigative or prosecution functions for the agency. Agency officials may not interfere with their decision making and administrative law judges may be discharged only for good cause established and determined after a hearing on the record. [2]
Only, ALJ's receive these protections. Some agencies conduct hearings before individuals referred to as "hearing officers" or "trial examiners." These individuals may perform functions similar to those of ALJ's, but they are not protected by the APA.
In American administrative law, ALJs are Article I judges, and are not Article III judges under the U.S. Constitution. Unlike Article III judges, Article I judges are not confirmed by the Senate. However, the United States Supreme Court has recognized that the role of a federal administrative law judge is "functionally comparable" to that of an Article III judge. An ALJs powers are often, if not generally, comparable to those of a trial judge: He may issue subpoenas, rule on proffers of evidence, regulate the course of the hearing, and make or recommend decisions. The process of agency adjudication is currently structured so as to assure that the hearing examiner exercises his independent judgment on the evidence before him, free from pressures by the parties or other officials within the agency." [3]
There are three nationwide professional organizations for ALJs: the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary (note that there is no "the" in the NAALJ's name), the Federal Administrative Law Judges Conference, and the Association of Administrative Law Judges.