Degge v. Hitchcock

Background

A group of people challenged an order by the Postmaster General that stopped them from receiving letters and money through the mail. The Postmaster General had given notice and held a hearing under a statute that lets him act “upon evidence satisfactory to him.” The challengers asked a federal court to issue the special appellate writ called certiorari to review that executive decision.

Reasoning

The Court explained that historically certiorari ran from court to court and was used where there was no other way to prevent injustice. Administrative orders by executive officers are different from final judgments of courts. Because the Postmaster General’s order was primarily administrative and made for the public’s protection, the Court said it was not a final judicial judgment fit for certiorari review. The opinion noted that affected people can seek relief in a court of equity, so certiorari was not necessary or appropriate here. The Court also warned that allowing certiorari to reach into departmental business would interfere with the Executive branch and slow administrative work.

Real world impact

The ruling affirms that federal courts will not use certiorari to overturn routine administrative decisions by executive officers like the Postmaster General. People or businesses who disagree with such administrative orders must pursue ordinary courts or equity remedies rather than this special writ. The decision is a narrow, procedural rule about how to challenge executive orders in federal courts.