Reference no: EM131129965

Explain how evidence can be obtained and used for purposes of enforcing regulatory rules. What are the constitutional issues surrounding the gathering of evidence by inspectors? Depending on the form of source, there are different types of evidence. Evidence in the concept of enforcing regulatory law governs the use of testimony. Under the law, evidence can be an oral or written statement; for example, affidavit. Evidence can also be obtained and used from exhibits or physical objects, and still yet, from documentary materials which are admissible in a judicial or administrative proceeding. However, there is guidelines/policy on admissible evidences in both federal and administrative hearings. Guidelines governing the rules of evidence attempt to dismiss some forms of evidence in hearings, to avoid risking lay jurors giving so much evidence so much value, Hall (2015). In the South Dakota v. Department of Interior case, the defendant (Secretary) used exhibit of the land affidavit accompanied by a written statement to keep the land in trust for the Indian Tribes. Constitutionally, the law allowed to be considered by the trier of fact, such as jury. Notwithstanding, the law must ensure certain regulatory guidelines are followed and set out to determine the kind of evidence presented to the court are trustworthy and admissible under the specific condition of the situation. When a civil or criminal matter is being disputed and reaches the court, there are required issues under evidence guidelines/policy one party must prove to persuade the court in his or her favor. The APA states, “Any oral or documentary evidence may be received, but the agency as a matter of policy shall provide for the exclusion of irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence” (Hall, 2015 p. 218). Reference: Hall, D. E. (2015). Administrative Law: Bureaucracy in a Democracy (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. This is the key your last sentence. The rules are much slacker than they are in the state and federal courts. Please answer this question: Do you think the slacker rules from evidence are good? if so, why so? If not, why not?