Which statement is true regarding the judicial review of independent agencies?

Judicial review of independent agencies is characterized by a degree of limitation compared to executive agencies due to the unique structure and functions of these agencies. Independent agencies are typically designed to operate with a higher level of autonomy from the executive branch, leading to specific statutory provisions and precedents that govern their review process.

While courts do have the authority to review actions taken by independent agencies, this review often focuses on determining whether the agency has acted within the scope of its statutory authority and whether its actions are arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion. This limited judicial scrutiny acknowledges the expertise and policy-making discretion that independent agencies possess, which is often greater than that of executive agencies. The courts may defer to the agency's interpretations of its governing statutes unless they are unreasonable.

In contrast, executive agencies may face broader judicial scrutiny, especially since they are directly part of the executive branch and their actions can be subjected to different standards of accountability. Thus, the limited judicial review of independent agencies reflects their unique role in the regulatory framework, balancing the need for agency expertise and autonomy against the need for oversight and accountability to the public.