SCOTUS Watch: Power of Federal Agencies Likely to be Restricted

Update:

“Chevron is overruled. Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority.

A central part of any president’s strategy for reining in greenhouse gas emissions has a big problem in a post-Chevron Washington: The regulators draw their authority from a law that Congress hasn’t significantly updated in 34 years — well before most lawmakers were even thinking about the dangers of climate change.

A rather arcane case brought by Chevron USA against the National Resources Defense Council involving the Clean Air Act was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1984, establishing the principle that “courts will give the [government] agency deference in ambiguous situations as long as its interpretation is reasonable,” according to Justia, a legal information website.

Chevron is likely the most frequently cited case in American administrative law and is the origin of the term “Chevron deference.”

That principle, long targeted by conservative groups, “lies at the heart of two cases the court heard this term: Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce,” reports Andrew Welch for Barron's on June 27. “Both cases involve fishing boat operators who challenged the constitutionality of federal government regulations intended to protect Atlantic herring fisheries.”

 During oral arguments in January, some conservative justices expressed skepticism about it, suggesting the court could overturn or curtail it.

Cataclysmic?

“Groups on both sides of the doctrine tend to talk about the case in cataclysmic terms because of the ways it could ripple through American law — changing the balance between those fighting government agencies, the agencies themselves and the courts overseeing the disputes,” reported Michael Macagnone for Roll Call on Jan. 26, 2024, the day before oral arguments were heard.

Macagnone wrote on May 1, 2023, after the Supreme Court agreed to review the case, that the outcome “could change the balance of power between executive agencies, Congress and the judiciary.”

“If the court decides to trim it back or fully overrule it, judges will be able to substitute their own interpretation of the law in more cases, and may be more likely to strike down existing agency rules,” reports Rachel Frazin, who covers energy and environment policy for The Hill, on June 25.

“[I]f the court gets rid of the doctrine, then we have a lot of questions about what kind of litigation will ensue, and I predict that a lot of particularly industry groups may bring challenges against environmental health and safety regulations that have been upheld under Chevron,” said Emily Hammond, [an expert in energy law, environmental law, and administrative law] at George Washington University.

The decision could come as early as Friday, June 28, or early next week.

A Planetizen news post last August, “Federal Fuel Economy Rules Take Different Path than Emission Standards,” referenced the Chevron deference principle, along with a 2022 landmark case involving federal regulations, W.Va. vs. EPA, which overturned the former President Obama's clean power plan rule.