Substantial Evidence Test
(APA  706) – for review of facts determined in agency adjudication
-Pre-APA standard of extreme deference
-Need “warrant in the record and a reasonable basis in law” (See NLRB v. Hearst Publications (1944): deferred to NLRB to say newsboys were employees by saying that was a factual finding)
-court basically got to determine jurisdiction
-substantial evidence later defined as more than a scintilla
-procedural approach – is there any evidence related to all the elements necessary to make out the case?
-APA made more demanding – “manifest weight of the evidence”
-Distinguish from Chevron which deals with law, not facts
-Winter proposes using Chevron for legal principles but requiring strong warrant in record for facts (See Allentown Mack Sales (1998)
-Must be based on substantial evidence in light of ENTIRE record (See Univ. Camera Corp. v. NLRB (1951))
-So agency considers positive and negative evidence
-in increasing strictness standards are arbitrary and capricious, substantial evidence (could reasonable mind accept record as adequate), and clearly erroneous (court standard – does reviewing judge have definite conviction error has been committed?)
-Scalia said arbitrary and capricious is same as substantial evidence in ADAPSO but most people disagree