Which of the following best describes the difference between rulemaking and adjudication?

• A. Adjudication creates general regulations; rulemaking applies rules to specific parties in legal proceedings.
• B. Rulemaking applies rules to individuals; adjudication creates general standards.
• C. Rulemaking creates general regulations; adjudication applies rules to specific parties in legal proceedings.
• D. Rulemaking uses court procedures; adjudication uses administrative discretion.

Answer: (C)

Rulemaking and adjudication are two different ways agencies shape and apply law. Rulemaking is the process by which an agency creates general regulations that will govern future behavior across many people and situations. Adjudication is the process of applying those rules to the facts of a specific dispute, yielding a decision about rights or duties for particular parties involved.

So the best description is that rulemaking creates general regulations, while adjudication applies rules to specific parties in legal proceedings. For context, rulemaking often involves notice and comment and results in broadly applicable standards; adjudication involves a hearing to resolve a particular case under those standards.

The other descriptions mix up roles: adjudication does not create general regulations, and rulemaking does not target rules to individuals in a single case. Additionally, the distinction isn’t about court procedures versus administrative discretion in that sense; both processes are administrative, with rulemaking focused on broad rules and adjudication focused on specific disputes.