ABSTRACT
The rise of the administrative state increasingly places individuals in the role of clients and customers of government agencies. Orthodox public administrative theory and practice placed little emphasis on relationships with individuals as clients and had virtually no customer orientation at all. The Supreme Court embraced the logic of the doctrine of privilege as it pertained to clients and customers in. Much of the literature contends that the courts are institutionally unsuited for successfully reforming public administrative operations through remedial law. The judicial response to the claims of clients and customers of the administrative state has been to abandon the doctrine of privilege and to place the administration of public benefits within constitutional constraints. Finally, judicial success or failure in spectacular or heroic efforts at reforming the administration of schools and other public benefits may be not be the most useful indicator of the courts' efficacy.
