Hirono and Schatz criticize the Chevron doctrine ruling

WASHINGTON — U.S. Senators Mazie Hirono and Brian Schatz, both of the Hawaii Democratic Party, sharply criticized the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which effectively strikes down the 40-year-old Chevron Doctrine, whereby courts defer to interpretations of vague regulations by federal agencies.

“Another day, another long-standing precedent rejected by a radical Supreme Court majority hell-bent on rewriting the rules to suit its corporate sponsors,” Hirono said. “By striking down Chevron, the conservative majority on this Court has jeopardized the entire regulatory system on which much of our country and our economy rests.”

The doctrine, also known as the Chevron deference, was established in 1984 in Chevron USA, Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. In that case, the court held that when Congress delegates to a federal agency the authority to administer a federal statute, courts will defer to that agency’s interpretation of the statute if it is ambiguous or unclear and cannot substitute its own interpretation.

Although conservatives initially embraced the doctrine as a safeguard against potential judicial activism, Hirono has previously argued that modern far-right conservatives now see it as an obstacle to consolidating power and allowing conservative judges to legislate while sitting on the bench.

In Friday’s 6-3 decision, the court overturned its earlier decision, which Chief Justice John Roberts called “fundamentally wrong,” and ruled that courts should be able to act on their own interpretations.

In the court’s 35-page ruling, Roberts said the Chevron doctrine violated the Administrative Procedure Act, which requires courts to apply their own judgment when deciding legal issues related to the interpretation of statutes.

“Accordingly, it is the court’s responsibility to decide whether the law means what the agency claims it means,” Roberts wrote.

Hirono and Schatz disagreed, arguing that respect should be given to those who know the topic best.

“At its core, this case was about who should make policy decisions on issues that affect our lives — subject matter experts or federal judges?” Hirono said. “Congress created federal agencies to implement informed, evidence-based laws that protect American citizens and small businesses across the country. By dismantling Chevron, the Court empowered hundreds of individual federal judges to overturn carefully considered decisions made by the agency’s experts, transforming a coherent regulatory framework into a chaotic mess of conflicting opinions, just as big business had long hoped.

“Today’s decision is another element of the far right’s broader mission to take over the courts, support its conservative ideological agenda and hollow out our regulatory system,” she said.

Schatz said the consequences of Friday’s decision could be serious on several fronts.

“The corrupt MAGA court’s disastrous decision to order federal agencies to stop doing their jobs means Americans will have less protection on everything from climate to health care to food safety,” Schatz said. “The Constitution is clear: Congress makes the laws, and the executive branch – through federal agencies – implements them, making sure they meet the country’s ever-changing needs.

“In the face of decades of precedent, this extreme court has once again sought to make it harder for the federal government to serve and defend the public interest. But make no mistake: the progress we have made in protecting our environment and making health care more affordable cannot be undone by a single decision by a group of unelected judges. Instead, outrageous decisions like this one should deepen our resolve to continue fighting for lasting progress on the issues that matter to people, whether it is cleaner skies, healthier food or more equitable workplaces.”

Michael Tsai covers local and state politics for Spectrum News Hawaii. He can be contacted at [email protected].