Who initially decides constitutional objections raised within an administrative proceeding?

In administrative proceedings, constitutional objections that arise typically fall under the purview of the agency itself to some extent, especially in the initial phases of the process. However, if the issue escalates and necessitates judicial intervention, it is the role of the trial court to decide these constitutional objections. This concept is grounded in the principle of judicial review, where courts are tasked with evaluating the legality of agency actions, including constitutional challenges.

When administrative decisions are contended on constitutional grounds, the trial court has the authority to determine if the agency's actions comply with constitutional requirements. The appellate court reviews decisions made by trial courts, not directly addressing initial objections. Similarly, the federal district court, as a trial court, also addresses such objections, yet the focus here is on the initial determination, which is often made by the trial court through its review of the agency's findings.

Thus, while the agency may have a role in addressing the implications of its own actions, the authority for making a judicial determination on constitutional issues primarily lies with the trial court in the context of an administrative proceeding.