Everything you need to answer the question below is in this book and attached pd

Everything you need to answer the question below is in this book and attached pdf.
You do not need to use outside sources.
The 1 source required is the book, I have attached it below. I have provided
the page numbers and the questions to be answered below. Please only use the pages
given from the book. Please also answer all parts of the questions. I have also attached a short video.
https://northeastern.hosted.panopto.com/Panopto/Pages/Viewer.aspx?id=6a7ea705-237c-4325-9126-af4800e4af6f&start=35.304415
To answer question number 3, I have attached the Biden vs.Texas File. Please use Kavanaugh’s reasoning
in Biden vs. Texas that I have attached.
Pages: 849-859, 898-902, 998-1030, 1035-1039 849-859, 898-902, 998-1030,
1035-1039 (To answer questions 1-2 Cases related to question 3, start on page 1035 of the PDF book attached)
1. In the Administrative Procedure Act, Congress set forth a list of grounds on which courts could “hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions.” Courts
may act if the agency’s action, findings, or conclusions are:
a. arbitrary or capricious;
b. an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law;
c. contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity;
d. in excess of statutory jurisdiction, authority, or limitations, or short of statutory right;
e. without observance of procedure required by law; and
f. unsupported by substantial evidence [in a formal rulemaking process].
Why did Congress choose this list? What goals do you think Congress was trying to
achieve by explicitly authorizing courts to intervene, but only on these selected
grounds? Cite to at least one case as an example for your argument.
2. One of the important procedural questions the Supreme Court has answered in
several contexts is, how much explanation must an agency provide regarding its actions or inaction? Yet, the Court has answered this question differently in different contexts
(e.g., the decision to promulgate a regulation vs. the decision not to take an enforcement action). Should the Court impose one standard that would apply in all contexts, or does it make sense to have differing standards depending upon the agency’s action or inaction? Cite to at least one case as an example for your argument.
3. In Department of Commerce v. New York and Biden v. Texas, the Court’s majority pointed out that newly elected presidents and their appointees are entitled to have different policy perspectives on regulatory issues than those of their predecessors. If the leaders of regulatory agencies arrive in their jobs with opinions about regulations, is the APA
process and judicial review of that process a sham? Why hold agencies to a process if
the result is generally known before the process begins? Cite to at least one case as an
example for your argument.