U.S. Code » Title 20 » Chapter CHAPTER 31— GENERAL PROVISIONS CONCERNING EDUCATION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER IV— ENFORCEMENT

20 U.S.C. § 1234g

Judicial review

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 20 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Recipients entitled to review; stay of action by Secretary

Any recipient of funds under an applicable program that would be adversely affected by a final agency action under section 1234a, 1234d, or 1234e of this title, and any State entitled to receive funds under a program described in section 1232d(a) of this title whose application has been disapproved by the Secretary, shall be entitled to judicial review of such action in accordance with the provisions of this section. The Secretary may not take any action on the basis of a final agency action until judicial review is completed.

(b) Petition for review; filing of record

A recipient that desires judicial review of an action described in subsection (a) shall, within 60 days of that action, file with the United States Court of Appeals for the circuit in which that recipient is located, a petition for review of such action. A copy of the petition shall be transmitted by the clerk of the court to the Secretary. The Secretary shall file in the court the record of the proceedings on which the action was based, as provided in section 2112 of title 28.

(c) Findings of fact

The findings of fact by the Office, if supported by substantial evidence, shall be conclusive; but the court, for good cause shown, may remand the case to the Office to take further evidence, and the Office may make new or modified findings of fact and may modify its previous action, and shall certify to the court the record of the further proceedings. Such new or modified findings of fact shall likewise be conclusive if supported by substantial evidence.

(d) Scope of review; review by Supreme Court

The court shall have jurisdiction to affirm the action of the Office or the Secretary or to set it aside, in whole or in part. The judgment of the court shall be subject to review by the Supreme Court of the United States upon certiorari or certification as provided in section 1254 of title 28.

(Pub. L. 90–247, title IV, § 458, as added Pub. L. 100–297, title III, § 3501(a), Apr. 28, 1988, 102 Stat. 356; amended Pub. L. 103–382, title II, § 212(b)(3)(D), Oct. 20, 1994, 108 Stat. 3913.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–382 made technical amendment to reference to section 1232d(a) of this title to reflect renumbering of corresponding section of original act.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 180 days after Apr. 28, 1988, but not applicable to recipients receiving written notice to return funds prior to that date, see section 3501(b) of Pub. L. 100–297, set out as an Effective Date of 1988 Amendment note under section 1234 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1990–2024 · leading case: Connecticut v. Spellings, 453 F. Supp. 2d 459 (D. Conn. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Connecticut v. Spellings, 453 F. Supp. 2d 459 (D. Conn. 2006). · cites it 5× “See 20 U.S.C. § 1234g ("A recipient that desires judicial review of a[] [final agency] action .”
Bd. of Educ. v. United States Dep't of Educ., 208 F. Supp. 3d 850 (S.D. Ohio 2016). · cites it 3× “1991) (holding that the “applicable judicial review provision” for “similar action” in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act is 20 U.S.C. § 1234g). The remainder of § 1683, in turn, only applies to funding terminations “not otherwise subject to judicial review.”
State of Tenn. v. Dep't of Educ., 104 F.4th 577 (6th Cir. 2024). · cites it 3× “1991) (finding that 20 U.S.C. § 1234g is “the appropriate judicial review provision[] for the termination order in” a case concerning “agency action terminating federal funding”).”
Ga. Dep't of Educ. v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., 883 F.3d 1311 (11th Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “20 U.S.C. § 1234g(b) ; Freeman v. Cavazos , 939 F.”
State of Wyoming v. Lamar Alexander, Sec'y of Educ., United States Dep't of Educ., 971 F.2d 531 (10th Cir. 1992). · cites it 3× “We have jurisdiction to review this petition pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1234g. 4 . Wyoming concedes that the EAB correctly disallowed the remaining $7,833 in grants for the Sublett and Washakie County school districts.”
State of Pennsylvania v. Richard W. Riley, Sec'y of the United States Dep't of Educ., 84 F.3d 125 (3rd Cir. 1996). “Pennsylvania only asks the Court to consider the propriety of the issuance of the Department’s Decision without an evidentiary hearing and without fully considering the evidence in the record regarding the State’s interpretation of the CJT program.”
Freeman v. Cavazos, 923 F.2d 1434 (11th Cir. 1991). · cites it 3× “§ 1234d (1988) describes the procedure for termination of assistance under all but one of the grant statutes at issue here, the applicable judicial review provision is 20 U.S.C. § 1234g, a section of the General Education Provisions Act, 20 U.”
Pennsylvania Dep't of Educ. v. Sec'y United States Dep't of Educ., 643 F. App'x 89 (3rd Cir. 2016). “We have jurisdiction over this petition for review pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1234g. We will set aside an agency decision that is "arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law.”
Freeman v. Cavazos, 756 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1990). “20 U.S.C. § 1234g(b) (1988). 6 . The exception is the Educational Agencies Financial Aid Act, commonly known as the Impact Aid Act.”
Missouri, Dep't of Soc. Servs. v. United States Dep't of Educ., 953 F.2d 372 (8th Cir. 1992). “The State of Missouri Department of Social Services (“DSS”) petitions pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1234g for review of a final agency action by the United States Department of Education (“Education”).”
Georgia Dep't of Educ. v. United State Dep't of Educ. (11th Cir. 2018). “DISCUSSION Petitioner argues the Secretary’s consideration of the underlying fraud scheme as reason to deny the equitable offset violates the statute’s “proportional- 2 We have jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s decision concerning recovery of grant funds from the state of…”
State of Washington Spokane Sch. Dist. No. 81 v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., 905 F.2d 274 (9th Cir. 1990). “20 U.S.C. § 1234g(c). VI Spokane argues we should order equitable relief from repayment because Spokane acted in good faith.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— 20 U.S.C. § 1234g(a) — 4 cases
Connecticut v. Spellings, 453 F. Supp. 2d 459 (D. Conn. 2006). “See 20 U.S.C. § 1234g ("A recipient that desires judicial review of a[] [final agency] action .”
Bd. of Educ. v. United States Dep't of Educ., 208 F. Supp. 3d 850 (S.D. Ohio 2016). “1991) (holding that the “applicable judicial review provision” for “similar action” in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act is 20 U.S.C. § 1234g). The remainder of § 1683, in turn, only applies to funding terminations “not otherwise subject to judicial review.”
Freeman v. Cavazos, 923 F.2d 1434 (11th Cir. 1991). “§ 1234d (1988) describes the procedure for termination of assistance under all but one of the grant statutes at issue here, the applicable judicial review provision is 20 U.S.C. § 1234g, a section of the General Education Provisions Act, 20 U.”
State of South Dakota v. Lamar Alexander, Sec'y of United States Dep't of Educ., 968 F.2d 1 (8th Cir. 1992).
— 20 U.S.C. § 1234g(b) — 5 cases
Bd. of Educ. v. United States Dep't of Educ., 208 F. Supp. 3d 850 (S.D. Ohio 2016). “1991) (holding that the “applicable judicial review provision” for “similar action” in Title VI of the Civil Rights Act is 20 U.S.C. § 1234g). The remainder of § 1683, in turn, only applies to funding terminations “not otherwise subject to judicial review.”
Ga. Dep't of Educ. v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., 883 F.3d 1311 (11th Cir. 2018). “20 U.S.C. § 1234g(b) ; Freeman v. Cavazos , 939 F.”
Freeman v. Cavazos, 756 F. Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1990). “20 U.S.C. § 1234g(b) (1988). 6 . The exception is the Educational Agencies Financial Aid Act, commonly known as the Impact Aid Act.”
Freeman v. Cavazos, 923 F.2d 1434 (11th Cir. 1991). “§ 1234d (1988) describes the procedure for termination of assistance under all but one of the grant statutes at issue here, the applicable judicial review provision is 20 U.S.C. § 1234g, a section of the General Education Provisions Act, 20 U.”
Georgia Dep't of Educ. v. United State Dep't of Educ. (11th Cir. 2018). “DISCUSSION Petitioner argues the Secretary’s consideration of the underlying fraud scheme as reason to deny the equitable offset violates the statute’s “proportional- 2 We have jurisdiction to review the Secretary’s decision concerning recovery of grant funds from the state of…”
— 20 U.S.C. § 1234g(c) — 3 cases
State of Wyoming v. Lamar Alexander, Sec'y of Educ., United States Dep't of Educ., 971 F.2d 531 (10th Cir. 1992). “We have jurisdiction to review this petition pursuant to 20 U.S.C. § 1234g. 4 . Wyoming concedes that the EAB correctly disallowed the remaining $7,833 in grants for the Sublett and Washakie County school districts.”
Ga. Dep't of Educ. v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., 883 F.3d 1311 (11th Cir. 2018). “20 U.S.C. § 1234g(b) ; Freeman v. Cavazos , 939 F.”
State of Washington Spokane Sch. Dist. No. 81 v. U.S. Dep't of Educ., 905 F.2d 274 (9th Cir. 1990). “20 U.S.C. § 1234g(c). VI Spokane argues we should order equitable relief from repayment because Spokane acted in good faith.”
— 20 U.S.C. § 1234g(e) — 1 case
Connecticut v. Spellings, 453 F. Supp. 2d 459 (D. Conn. 2006). “See 20 U.S.C. § 1234g ("A recipient that desires judicial review of a[] [final agency] action .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.