The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that could reverse -- or at least narrow -- the longstandingChevrondoctrine, which grants EPA and other federal agencies discretion to reasonably interpret ambiguous statutory language. The court May 1 granted a petition for awrit of certiorariinLoper ...
The petitioners seek to overturn or greatly limit a 39-year-old Supreme Court case,Chevron vs. Natural Resources Defense Council. That ruling said that if a federal law is silent or ambiguous on a specific question, courts should defer to government agencies’ interpretation of the statute. Adv...
management of the fishery.\nThe court limited its consideration of the case to a specific question with broad consequences: whether the justices should revisit their 1984 decision establishing the Chevron doctrine, which gives\nagencies like EPA leeway to interpret ambiguous statutes like the Clean ...
Is there any doubt that the carefully manufactured conservative majority on the Supreme Court, having already dispatched the “Chevron doctrine” through some clumsy judicial legerdemain, has been waiting to hook off that job the way they dropped McCutcheon after Citizens United? There is a plan, ...
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson recused herself from the case, since she was on the lower court's three-judge panel that heard arguments in the dispute last year. At least two of the justices, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, have been critical of the Chevron doctrine, and a growing move...
DiscardingChevron.One option for the Court is eliminating theChevrondoctrine altogether. If the Court takes this approach, the law would likely revert to the rule set forth in the 1944 U.S. Supreme Court case ofSkidmore v. Swift & Co., which credits an agency's interpretation ...
which involved a challenge to a regulation enacted by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Air Act, have said the so-called Chevron doctrine gives unelected federal bureaucrats too much power in crafting regulations that touch on major areas of American life, such as the workplace,...
The U.S. Supreme Court accepted review of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo,1 which may determine the fate of the deference doctrine established in Chevron2 in 1984. The issue in Loper is whether the Court should overrule Chevron, or limit or clarify the applicability of requiring deference...
The US Supreme Court’s decision on June 28 in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce has overruled the longstanding Chevron doctrine that required courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of a statute it administers when the statute ...
The arguments presented by both sides are complex and both practical and theoretical. The ways the Court could choose to resolve the question presented are several. One is the question of the first step of the test: When is a statute truly ambiguous s...