U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART I— THE AGENCIES GENERALLY › Chapter CHAPTER 8— CONGRESSIONAL REVIEW OF AGENCY RULEMAKING

5 U.S.C. § 805

Judicial review

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar

No determination, finding, action, or omission under this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: Kansas Nat. Resource v. United States Dept of Interior, 971 F.3d 1222 (10th Cir. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Kansas Nat. Resource v. United States Dept of Interior, 971 F.3d 1222 (10th Cir. 2020). · cites it 5× “DOI moved to dismiss the complaint, asserting that (1) KNRC lacks Article III standing; (2) the limitations period has expired; and (3) 5 U.S.C. § 805 precludes judicial review of DOI’s failure to submit the PECE Rule to Congress.”
Ctr. for Bio. Diversity v. David Bernhardt, 946 F.3d 553 (9th Cir. 2019). · cites it 3× “” 5 U.S.C. § 805 (the “Jurisdiction-Stripping Provision”).”
Wash. All. of Tech. Workers v. U.S. Dep't of Homeland SEC., 892 F.3d 332 (D.C. Cir. 2018). “" 5 U.S.C. § 805 . This judicial-review prohibition "denies courts the power to void rules on the basis of agency noncompliance with the Act.”
Kan. Nat. Res. Coal. v. U.S. Dep't of the Interior, 382 F. Supp. 3d 1179 (D. Kan. 2019). · cites it 5× “Another provision of the CRA, 5 U.S.C. § 805 , provides that "[n]o determination, finding, action, or omission under this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.”
Via Christi Reg'l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Leavitt, 509 F.3d 1259 (10th Cir. 2007). “5 U.S.C. § 805 (“No determination, finding, action, or omission under this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.”
United States v. Am. Elec. Power Serv. Corp., 218 F. Supp. 2d 931 (S.D. Ohio 2002). “" 5 U.S.C. § 805 . The Defendants take issue with the stated bar to judicial review.”
Citizens for Constitutional v. United States, 57 F.4th 750 (10th Cir. 2023). “” 5 U.S.C. § 805 . “‘Under this chapter’ refers to duties the CRA imposes on various actors, whether those duties take the form of determinations, 8 Appellate Case: 21-1317 Document: 010110795646 Date Filed: 01/10/2023 Page: 9 findings, actions, or omissions.”
Montanans for Multiple Use v. Barbouletos, 542 F. Supp. 2d 9 (D.D.C. 2008). “Defendants move the Court to dismiss this claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because 5 U.S.C. § 805 provides that “[n]o determination, finding, action or omission under this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.”
In Re Operation of the Missouri River Sys. Litig., 363 F. Supp. 2d 1145 (D. Minnesota 2004). “5 U.S.C. § 805 . Even so, there is no evidence that the FWS’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.”
Provena Hospitals v. Sebelius, 662 F. Supp. 2d 140 (D.D.C. 2009). “" 5 U.S.C. § 805 . See Montanans for Multiple Use v.”
Foster v. The United States Dep't of Agric. (D.S.D. 2022). · cites it 8× “5 U.S.C. § 805 of the CRA states that □□□□□ determination, finding, action, or omission under this chapter shall be subject to judicial review.”
Arlen Foster v. U.S. Dept. of Agric., 68 F.4th 372 (8th Cir. 2023). · cites it 2× “Finally, the CRA contains a judicial review provision, 5 U.S.C. § 805 , which provides that “[n]o determination, finding, action, or omission under [the CRA] shall be subject to judicial review.”
Show all 21 citing cases →
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.