Love v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 704 F.2d 100 (1983)

Citation: Love v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 704 F.2d 100 (1983)
Parent Document: Love v. United States Department of Housing & Urban Development, 704 F.2d 100 (1983)
Jurisdiction: United States (federal)
Effective Date: 1983-03-31
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8926891/love-v-united-states-department... ↗

Full Text

732 chars

There is no doubt that the principles of Vermont Yankee apply in the rulemaking context, regardless of whether § 4 itself is involved. Even though HUD’s procedures in this case conform to the notice and comment provisions of § 4 of the APA, we need not — and therefore do not — reach the question whether HUD’s practice of soliciting public comment in situations such as that involved in this case is required by force of the APA. We hold only that the opportunity provided by HUD for tenant participation in the rulemaking process forecloses any argument by the appellees that they were denied their due process rights or that any compelling circumstances exist which would permit district court interference with agency procedure.

Other Sections in This Document (55)

Full Text