Board Authority and Rulemaking
The Alabama Board of Chiropractic Examiners proposes a new rule requiring all chiropractors to complete a 2-hour course on opioid prescribing alternatives as part of their continuing education. The Board publishes notice of the proposed rule in the Alabama Administrative Monthly and invites public comment. During the comment period, several chiropractors object, arguing that the Board lacks authority to mandate specific course content and that the rule imposes an undue burden. The Board considers the comments and decides to adopt the rule as proposed. A chiropractor who opposes the rule files a lawsuit in circuit court, seeking to invalidate the rule on the grounds that the Board exceeded its statutory authority and that the rule is arbitrary and capricious.
1. Does the Alabama Board of Chiropractic Examiners have the authority to adopt the proposed rule? Discuss the Board's rulemaking powers under the Alabama Chiropractic Practice Act and the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act.
Read the worked answer
The Board's rulemaking authority is derived from Ala. Code § 34-24-140 et seq., which empowers the Board to adopt rules necessary to carry out the provisions of the chiropractic practice act. Specifically, the Board may establish continuing education requirements as a condition of license renewal. The Board also has general authority to regulate the practice of chiropractic to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The proposed rule requiring a course on opioid alternatives is within the Board's authority if it is rationally related to the practice of chiropractic and the public interest. The opioid crisis is a public health concern, and chiropractors may see patients with pain; thus, education on alternatives is relevant. However, the Board must comply with the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act (Ala. Code § 41-22-1 et seq.) in adopting the rule: provide notice, allow public comment, and ensure the rule is not arbitrary or capricious. If the Board followed proper procedure and the rule is within its statutory authority, the rule is valid.
2. What standard of review will the court apply in determining whether the rule is arbitrary and capricious?
Read the worked answer
Under the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act, a court reviewing a rule will uphold it unless it is arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion, or unless it exceeds the Board's statutory authority. The court will consider whether the rule is rationally related to a legitimate government interest. The court will defer to the Board's expertise and will not substitute its judgment for that of the Board. The burden is on the challenger to show that the rule is invalid. In this case, the chiropractor would need to show that the rule has no rational basis or that the Board failed to consider relevant factors. Given the opioid crisis and the Board's broad authority over continuing education, the court is likely to uphold the rule if the Board followed proper procedures and the rule is reasonably related to the practice of chiropractic.