Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Richard Pickus v. United States Board of Parole, 543 F.2d 240 (1976)

Citation
Richard Pickus v. United States Board of Parole, 543 F.2d 240 (1976)
Parent Document
Richard Pickus v. United States Board of Parole, 543 F.2d 240 (1976)
Effective Date
1976-06-09

Other Sections in This Document (76)

Full Text

846 chars
. The Court reasoned: “Certainly the Constitution does not require oral argument in all cases where only insubstantial or frivolous questions of law, or indeed even substantial ones, are raised. Equally certainly it has left wide discretion to Congress in creating the procedures to be followed in both administrative and judicial proceedings, as well as in their conjunction . . [To follow the Court of Appeals ruling] would do violence not only to our former decisions but also, we think, to the constitutional power of Congress to devise differing administrative and legal procedures appropriate for the disposition of issues affecting interests widely varying in kind.” 337 U.S. at 276, 69 S.Ct. at 1103 (1949). 15 . 49 U.S.C. § 1(14)(a) (1970). 16 . The Florida East Coast opinion thus extended United States v. Allegheny-Ludlum Steel Corp.,