Final answer:
Substantial evidence is a standard for court review of administrative agency decisions, requiring enough evidence that a reasonable mind might accept to support a conclusion, ensuring agency accountability and fairness.
Step-by-step explanation:
Substantial Evidence in Judicial Review
Substantial evidence is a standard used by courts during judicial review for evaluating the decisions made by administrative agencies. This standard requires that the agency's decision be supported by enough relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. It is less stringent than the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' standard used in criminal trials but more demanding than the 'preponderance of the evidence' standard used in civil cases. When reviewing agency decisions, courts look for substantial evidence to ensure that decisions are not arbitrary or capricious. This involves examining the record for a sufficient amount of evidence which supports the agency's findings and conclusions.
Importance of Substantial Evidence
Substantial evidence is crucial for upholding the rule of law and ensuring agencies are accountable for their decisions. It is one way our legal system attempts to maintain fairness when individuals or organizations challenge agency actions. The courts, including the Supreme Court, use this standard to assess whether government agencies have followed legal principles and acted within their bounds.