If you thought the President ran the executive department . . .

[CO. Hoosier]

Isn't OMB?

Here is what google ai says . . .

Yes, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is considered subject to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to a certain extent, meaning it must follow certain procedural requirements when issuing regulations, particularly regarding the review process of other agencies' rules which are subject to the APA; however, the OMB itself is not typically directly regulated by the APA in its own internal operations.

 

[The Original Happy Goat]

Here is what google ai says

@BradStevens

 

[BradStevens]

Here is what google ai says . . .

Yes, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is considered subject to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to a certain extent, meaning it must follow certain procedural requirements when issuing regulations, particularly regarding the review process of other agencies' rules which are subject to the APA; however, the OMB itself is not typically directly regulated by the APA in its own internal operations.

I think you should read the opinion.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I think you should read the opinion.

I read the salient parts.

 

[The Original Happy Goat]

I read the salient parts.

You didn't realize "irrational and imprudent" was in the same paragraph as "arbitrary and capricious." In fact, you didn't realize "arbitrary and capricious" appeared in the order at all. So, no, you did not read the salient parts. You probably didn't read any of the parts.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

You didn't realize "irrational and imprudent" was in the same paragraph as "arbitrary and capricious." In fact, you didn't realize "arbitrary and capricious" appeared in the order at all. So, no, you did not read the salient parts. You probably didn't read any of the parts.

Don’t tell me what I did. I word searched the order and read everything pertaining to those four words plus more. The judge, for al, practical purposes, has ruled the action is arbitrary and capricious because it is not prudent and is irrational. In other words she disagreed with it. Fair enough, but it isn’t her call.

 

[BradStevens]

Don’t tell me what I did. I word searched the order and read everything pertaining to those four words plus more. The judge, for al, practical purposes, has ruled the action is arbitrary and capricious because it is not prudent and is irrational. In other words she disagreed with it. Fair enough, but it isn’t her call.

The APA and SCt precedent say it is her call. She cites it in the order. I copied it here.

And, at least from her order, it doesn't appear the Defendants disputed that it was her call if she found it arbitrary and capricious.