In substantial evidence review, what is required of the evidentiary record?

In substantial evidence review, what is required of the evidentiary record?

• A. The record must contain reliable, relevant, probative evidence that a reasonable mind could accept as adequate.
• B. The court reweighs the evidence de novo.
• C. The agency's interpretation must be unique.
• D. The findings are presumed correct regardless of evidence.

Answer: (A)

The point being tested is what “substantial evidence review” requires for the agency’s factual findings. Under this standard, the evidentiary record must contain reliable, relevant, probative evidence that a reasonable mind could accept as adequate to support the agency’s conclusions. In other words, there has to be enough credible evidence in the record for a reasonable person to conclude the agency was justified in its findings. The court does not reweigh the evidence from scratch; it defers to the agency as long as the record as a whole provides substantial support for the agency’s factual determinations. The agency’s interpretation of the law need not be unique, as long as the chosen interpretation is reasonable and consistent with the statute and its purposes. And there isn’t a blanket presumption that findings are correct regardless of the evidence; the findings must be supported by substantial evidence or the decision can be challenged.

The point being tested is what “substantial evidence review” requires for the agency’s factual findings. Under this standard, the evidentiary record must contain reliable, relevant, probative evidence that a reasonable mind could accept as adequate to support the agency’s conclusions. In other words, there has to be enough credible evidence in the record for a reasonable person to conclude the agency was justified in its findings.

The court does not reweigh the evidence from scratch; it defers to the agency as long as the record as a whole provides substantial support for the agency’s factual determinations. The agency’s interpretation of the law need not be unique, as long as the chosen interpretation is reasonable and consistent with the statute and its purposes. And there isn’t a blanket presumption that findings are correct regardless of the evidence; the findings must be supported by substantial evidence or the decision can be challenged.