ANOTHER NCLA VICTORY: In NCLA Victory, Dep’t of Transportation Scraps Illegitimate Administrative Proceeding vs. gh Package.

Today, the New Civil Liberties Alliance agreed to a stipulated dismissal of its gh Package v. Buttigieg lawsuit challenging the Department of Transportation’s unconstitutional and abusive administrative enforcement regime. NCLA’s federal-court lawsuit successfully pressured DOT to dismiss with prejudice its case against a family-run company, gh Package Product Testing and Consulting, Inc., which tests packages used to transport hazardous chemicals safely. The stipulated dismissal follows DOT’s dismissal of its administrative proceeding against gh Package with prejudice. NCLA celebrates this great victory for its client.

DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) launched the enforcement proceeding against gh last year, claiming the company submitted test reports with minor inaccuracies that violated DOT regulations. DOT hauled gh into its in-house tribunal, where agency officials violate the due process of law by acting as both prosecutor and adjudicator and by depriving defendants of jury trials. DOT’s in-house adjudicators are illegitimate under Article II of the Constitution because neither the President nor the Secretary of Transportation appoints them and they enjoy improper protection from presidential removal. Rather than defend against these constitutional defects on the merits in a real federal court, DOT decided to dismiss its enforcement proceeding.

As a result of NCLA’s recent Supreme Court victory in Michelle Cochran’s fight against the Securities and Exchange Commission, gh was able to challenge DOT’s unlawful tribunal directly in district court before having to endure the entire administrative proceeding. NCLA requested a preliminary injunction in August to stop the unconstitutional proceeding against gh. Just days before PHMSA was to file its final brief opposing that injunction, it withdrew its notice accusing gh of probable wrongdoing, thus ending the unlawful proceeding as NCLA requested. The Administrative Law Judge who oversaw the enforcement proceeding ultimately dismissed it, declaring that “[b]y its decision to take no further action on the allegations,” PHMSA had “in effect failed to meet its burden” to prove its accusations. NCLA is pleased to have vindicated its client in this successful case against DOT’s unlawful enforcement regime, and we hope that defendants in similar proceedings will take note.

I expect that they will. And the viability of proceedings before Administrative Law Judges is growing steadily more dubious.