(JR is mechanism for enforcing procedural and substantive constraints on agency action
-    Does statute grant right to review? – APA § 704 says then JR available
-    Overton Park – presumption that limited judicial review is available
-    just need “law to apply”
-    agency must provide record (“hard look” at record)
-    review is basically procedural
-    compare – Israel – substantive review
-    exceptions
-    statutory preclusion
-    explicit
-    implicit – separation of powers grounds
-    functional considerations (See Block – no actions for consumers since Congress authorized actions by dairy producers)
-    doesn’t apply if challenging enabling act (Johnson v. Robinson)
-    “committed to agency discretion by law” (§ 701)
-    no law to apply
-    statute says agency has final authority (Webster v. Doe)
-    but still get review of constitutional questions
-    prosecutorial discretion (Heckler v. Chaney – presumptively not reviewable)
-    doesn’t apply to rulemaking (See American Horse Protection Assoc.)
-    but failure to make rule is not same thing as denial (See Norton v. S. Utah Wilderness Society)
-    beneficiary suits
-    explicit cause of action (e.g., citizen suit provision in environmental statute)
-    means person falls within zone of interests but still need to satisfy standing
-    implicit
-    Test (Cort. v. Ash)
-    statute creates federal right in favor of P
-    indication of legislative intent to create or deny remedy
-    Is remedy consistent with underlying purposes of statute?
-    Is COA specifically relegated to state law
-    presumption against implied right of action (Alexander v. Sandoval) so need indication in statute