The Administrative State and its Constitutional Legitimacy: An Analysis of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 in the Context of Rohr’s Constitutional Framework of the Administrative State

 
 
 
 

The Administrative State and its Constitutional Legitimacy: An Analysis of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 in the Context of Rohr’s Constitutional Framework of the Administrative State

Show full item record


Title: The Administrative State and its Constitutional Legitimacy: An Analysis of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 in the Context of Rohr’s Constitutional Framework of the Administrative State
Author: Ulvi-Ahmad, Ghazala
Description: American Public Administration has identified more closely with management than with governance. Therefore, its constitutional legitimacy is often questioned. Many of the current scholars emphasize the importance of the legitimacy of the administrative state from a constitutional perspective. John Rohr is both the pioneering and the standard setting work in this area. Rohr attempts to legitimate the administrative state in terms of a comprehensive constitutional perspective based on the founding of the American Republic. This study examined Rohr’s constitutional philosophy of the administrative state and tested its usefulness to Public Administrators. The study looked at both the administrative agencies and processes created by the USA Patriot Act 2001 and their compatibility with Rohr’s constitutional framework. The major research question posed: Is the USA PATRIOT Act 2001 legitimate within Rohr’s framework of the administrative state? Specifically, does the USA PATRIOT Act create and empower executive agencies beyond the pale of separation of powers as developed by Rohr? The study concluded that selected provisions from the statute are problematic in terms of their compatibility with the constitutional traditions and regime values as defined by Rohr. However, to successfully use the framework, American public administration must address issues of structure and authority. One, high-level civil servants must possess sufficient discretionary power. They must be able to say no to the political leaders. Second, they must possess working legal knowledge of the Constitution and understand the core values embedded in our constitutional traditions of democratic governance.
Permanent Link: http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=csu1199824023
http://hdl.handle.net/2374.OX/4136
Date: 2007

Files in this item

Files Size Format View

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show full item record