▁below . ▁ ▁These ▁powers ▁of ▁review ▁of ▁administrative ▁dec isions , ▁while ▁often ▁govern ed ▁by ▁stat ute , ▁were ▁originally ▁developed ▁out ▁of ▁the ▁royal ▁pr er og ative ▁writ s ▁of ▁English ▁law ▁such ▁as ▁the ▁writ ▁of ▁mand am us ▁and ▁the ▁writ ▁of ▁cert ior ari . ▁ ▁Thus , ▁it ▁is ▁not ▁enough ▁to ▁simply ▁claim ▁that ▁the ▁rule making ▁ag ency ▁could ▁have ▁done ▁a ▁better ▁job . ▁ ▁Instead , ▁under ▁U . S . ▁administrative ▁law , ▁to ▁ask ▁the ▁court ▁to ▁order ▁changes ▁in ▁a ▁rule , ▁a ▁party ▁must ▁argue ▁that ▁the ▁rule ▁is : ▁ ▁Ar bitr ary ▁and ▁cap r icious ▁and / or ▁un supported ▁by ▁the ▁record . ▁Most ▁frequently , ▁object ors ▁will ▁argue ▁that , ▁even ▁if ▁the ▁judge ▁is ▁not ▁an ▁expert , ▁the ▁judge ▁can ▁tell ▁that ▁there ▁is ▁an ▁obvious ▁gap ▁in ▁the ▁ag ency ’ s ▁data ▁or ▁analysis . ▁ ▁A ▁court ▁may ▁interven e ▁if ▁it ▁finds ▁that ▁there ▁is ▁no ▁reasonable ▁way ▁that ▁the ▁ag ency ▁could ▁have ▁draft ed ▁the ▁rule , ▁given ▁the ▁evidence ▁in ▁the ▁rule making ▁record . ▁ ▁A ▁court ▁may ▁send ▁a ▁rule ▁back ▁to ▁the ▁ag ency ▁for ▁further ▁analysis , ▁generally ▁leaving ▁the ▁ag ency ▁to ▁decide ▁whether ▁to ▁change ▁the ▁rule ▁to ▁match ▁the ▁existing ▁record ▁or ▁to ▁am end ▁the ▁record ▁to ▁show ▁how ▁they ▁arrived ▁at ▁the ▁original ▁rule . ▁If ▁a ▁court ▁does ▁rem and ▁a ▁rule