The discussion explains how legal analyses of separation of powers and of judicial oversight of agencies implicitly use three decisionmaking frameworks: politics, scientific expertise, and adjudicatory fairness. It also explores the relationships among the three approaches and cites examples showing the need to recognize their connections rather than assuming that they are separate. The discussion concludes that the guiding principle in administrative law is that courts should apply legal doctrines to control the discretion of unelected bureaucrats. However, in practice these doctrines simply give unelected judges largely unconstrained discretion. Therefore, administrative law should redirect its attention from bureaucratic discretion to the promotion of sound governance. Footnotes and index. (Publisher summary modified)