{{distinguish|Adjudication}} {{Short description|Someone who presides, judges and arbitrates during a formal dispute}}
An '''adjudicator''' is someone who presides, judges, and arbitrates during a formal dispute or competition.<ref>{{cite web|url= https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/adjudicator?|title=ADJUDICATOR - definition in the Cambridge Dictionary|publisher=Cambridge Dictionary|access-date=16 March 2026}}</ref> They have numerous purposes, including preliminary legal judgments, to determine applicant eligibility, or to assess contenders' performance in competitions.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://jobs.lacba.org/career/adjudicator?|title=What does an Adjudicator do? Career Overview|publisher=Los Angeles County Bar Association|access-date=16 March 2026}}</ref>
== Types == ===Administrative law===
In American administrative law, government agencies in the executive branch of the federal government often engage in a quasi-judicial activity known as adjudication: "an agency action with the force of law that resolves a claim or dispute between specific individuals in a specific case".<ref name="Harrington">{{cite web |last1=Harrington |first1=Ben |last2=Sheffner |first2=Daniel J. |title=Informal Administrative Adjudication: An Overview |url=https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/R/PDF/R46930/R46930.3.pdf |website=Congress.gov |publisher=United States Congress |location=Washington, D.C. |date=October 1, 2021}}</ref> Americans distinguish between formal adjudication presided over by administrative law judges (ALJs), "a special class of adjudicators" appointed pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), and informal adjudication presided over by a variety of officials who are not ALJs.<ref name="Harrington" />
The original intent of the APA's drafters was that it would cover nearly all agency adjudications, but that objective was never achieved. During the 1980s, one reason for why many agencies started to get away with conducting informal adjudications outside the APA with non-ALJ officials is that they exploited the broad deference afforded to their interpretation of their governing statutes by ''Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.'' (1984).<ref name="Barnett1">{{cite journal |last1=Barnett |first1=Kent H. |author1-link=Kent Barnett |title=Some Kind of Hearing Officer |journal=Washington Law Review |date=June 2019 |volume=94 |issue=2 |pages=515–582 |url=https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2307&context=fac_artchop}} (At p. 534.)</ref>
For lack of a better term, the non-ALJ officials who conduct such informal adjudications are sometimes referred to as "non-ALJ adjudicators" or "non-ALJs".<ref name="Barnett2">{{cite journal |last1=Barnett |first1=Kent H. |author1-link=Kent Barnett |last2=Wheeler |first2=Russell |title=Non-ALJ Adjudicators in Federal Agencies: Status, Selection, Oversight, and Removal |journal=Georgia Law Review |date=2018 |volume=53 |issue=1 |pages=1–128 |url=https://georgialawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/Kent-Barnett-Russell-Wheeler-Non-ALJ-Adjudicators-in-Federal-Agencies-Status-Selection-Oversight-and-Removal-53-Georgia-Law-Review-1-2019.pdf}} (At pp. 8, 32-38.)</ref> Since the early 1990s, non-ALJ adjudicators have greatly outnumbered ALJs.<ref name="Barnett1" /> A 2018 study found that there were approximately 1,931 ALJs and 10,831 non-ALJ adjudicators.<ref name="Barnett2" /> The study identified 37 different types of non-ALJ adjudicators sharing 23 titles (e.g., multiple agencies use the term "Hearing Officer").<ref name="Barnett2" />
The dramatic shift towards non-ALJ adjudicators and away from ALJs has been blamed on ALJs' much higher salaries, as well as rigid federal civil service rules for ALJ positions that prevent agency executives from hiring a non-veteran candidate with litigation experience directly related to an agency's governing statute over a veteran candidate whose prior litigation experience has no connection to the agency.<ref name="Lubbers">{{cite journal |last1=Lubbers |first1=Jeffrey |title=APA-Adjudication: Is the Quest for Uniformity Faltering |journal=Administrative Law Journal of the American University |date=1996 |volume=10 |pages=65–80 |url=https://digitalcommons.wcl.american.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2649&context=facsch_lawrev}}</ref> The civil service rules also make it nearly impossible to fire incompetent ALJs.<ref name="Lubbers" />
Among the more prominent examples of non-ALJ adjudicators who operate outside of the formal adjudication provisions of the APA are immigration judges of the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) of the United States Department of Justice and the administrative judges of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).<ref name="Harrington" /> However, as of 2018, the bulk of non-ALJ adjudicators consisted of the 7,856 patent examiners of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, who vastly outnumbered EOIR's 326 immigration judges and the EEOC's 87 administrative judges.<ref name="Barnett2" />
===Construction=== {{for|adjudicators involved in construction decision-making under Australian and English law|Adjudication#Construction law}}
===Official evaluations {{anchor|competition judge}} === An adjudicator (often referred to as a "judge", "umpire", "arbiter", or more archaically as a "daysman"<ref name="Webster2020"> {{cite web |title = '''daysman''' - noun |location = Springfield, MA |publisher = Merriam-Webster Dictionary |url = https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/daysman |website = merriam-webster.com |year = 2020 |quote = '''1''' – ''archaic'': UMPIRE, ARBITER. '''2''' – ''archaic'': DAY LABORER. |access-date = June 2, 2020 }}</ref>), is a person who gives a critical evaluation of performances in competitions, festivals or talent shows, resulting in the award of marks, medals or prizes.
In British Parliamentary Style debate, an adjudicator<ref>{{cite web|url=http://flynn.debating.net/ |title=World Debate Website |work=debating.net |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120424202856/http://flynn.debating.net/ |archivedate=2012-04-24 }}</ref> weighs arguments and decides rankings in the house.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://phased-uph.weebly.com/uploads/3/2/1/6/32162939/comprehensive_adjudication_guide.pdf|title=A Comprehensive Guide to Debate Adjudication|pages=4|author=Abdul Latif, Muhammad|publisher=International Islamic University Malaysia|access-date=16 March 2026}}</ref> There are different types of adjudicators, each with their respective duties and levels of authority: chair, panelist, and trainee.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://debateengland.com/glossary-of-debating-terminology/#:~:text=Adjudicator:%20Also%20known%20as%20the,the%20break%20to%20elimination%20rounds.|title=Glossary of Debating Terminology - Debate England|publisher=Debate England|access-date=16 March 2026}}</ref> In the event that the chair is the chief adjudicator of the tournament, they are referred to as "Speaker".
== References == {{Reflist|30em}}
== Sources == * Adjudicators Field Manual, United States Department of Homeland Security, Citizenship and Immigration Services
{{Authority control}} Category:Legal professions Category:Scots law general titles Category:Law of the United Kingdom