Supreme Court curbs federal agencies’ regulatory authority, reversing 40-year-old herringbone precedent

The Supreme Court overturned a 40-year-old precedent that gave federal agencies leeway to interpret unclear statutes when creating and enforcing regulations.

Six conservative Supreme Court justices voted to overturn the so-called “Chevron Doctrine,” which has its roots in a 1984 case and affects everything from enforcement of clean air and water laws to FCC rules on broadcasting and the Internet.

More from Deadline

“Chevron opposes the (Administrative Procedure Act) mandate that the “trial court” – and not the body whose action it is reviewing – is to “decide and interpret all relevant legal issues.” . . statutory provisions,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion.

He added that “Chevron cannot be reconciled with the APA, as the government and dissenters claim, on the assumption that the statutory ambiguities are implied delegations to the agency.”

Read the Supreme Court’s opinion reversing the Chevron ruling.

In dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that in the majority ruling, “the Court flips the script: now it is ‘courts (not agencies)’ that will exercise authority as Congress leaves the realm of interpretive discretion. The principle of judicial humility gives way to the principle of judicial hubris.”

She added: “In one fell swoop, today’s majority has given itself exclusive authority over every open
issue – no matter how knowledge-based or policy-laden – encompasses the importance of regulatory law. As if she didn’t have enough on her plate, most turn herself into the country’s administrative czar.”

This decision makes it all the more likely that any regulations will be challenged unless more specific action is taken by Congress. Conservatives and business groups have long had their sights set on the “Chevron Doctrine,” and the majority’s decision is really no surprise given the court’s shift to the right.

The best date