In Tummino v. Hamburg, the court held that?
A. ?the Secretary of Health and Human Services, rather than the Food and Drug Administration, did have authority to make the decision concerning emergency contraceptives.
B. ?the action of the Secretary of Health and Human Services was not reviewable under the Administrative Procedure Act.
C. ?the decisions of the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to emergency contraceptives were arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.
D. ?the decisions of the Secretary of Health and Human Services with respect to emergency contraceptives, although political, were not arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
Answer: C
You might also like to view...
The body language of a person may best be assessed to determine?
A. ?whether the person is lying. B. ?whether the firm should take the person's case. C. ?how a jury will perceive the person. D. ?a person's intelligence.
Define "court-annexed ADR" and describe its purpose
What will be an ideal response?
Most paralegals specialize in ____________________.
Fill in the blank(s) with the appropriate word(s).
The legal doctrine that governs water use in the eastern United States is:
a. Prior appropriation doctrine b. Littoral use doctrine c. Reasonable use doctrine d. Riparian use doctrine