By overturning the Chevron doctrine, the Supreme Court stripped federal agencies like the EPA of final say when interpreting ambiguous legislative policies, leaving future decisions up to judges.
According to an article from Grist, “The Supreme Court on Friday threw into question the future of climate and environmental regulation in the United States, scrapping a decades-old legal precedent that gave federal agencies leeway to interpret laws according to their expertise and scientific evidence.” Legal experts say the decision, which overturns the “Chevron deference” could lead to an increase in legal challenges against federal agency regulations that keep our land, water, and air clean, and mitigate climate change.
Grist reporters Jake Bittle and Zoya Teirstein write, “Federal courts have long deferred to federal agencies to interpret laws that are unclear and need further clarification. In 1984, a shorthanded Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous decision that federal agencies have the final say on ambiguous policies, which allowed those agencies broad authority to make decisions without fear of judicial override.” The Supreme Court’s recent decision revokes that authority and instead will leave decisions up to judges, who do not have the breadth of financial, scientific, and safety expertise that federal agencies have.
The Grist article delves deeper into the Court’s opinions, but broadly, the Court’s majority opinion (6-3) felt the Chevron deference stripped courts of judicial power and permitted overreach by the executive branch, while dissenting justices say that authority was crucial to protect the environment, public health, and economy and that, without it, the Supreme Court will now function as the “country’s administrative czar.”
“What’s at stake [in the decision] is whether courts are going to defer to agencies interpreting statutes or whether courts are going to stop doing that, and with more regularity take it on themselves to interpret the statutes even when they’re ambiguous, which means they may be in the position of making more policy choices,” Michael Burger, the director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, told Grist.
FULL STORY: The Supreme Court overturns Chevron doctrine, gutting federal environmental protections
Planetizen Federal Action Tracker
A weekly monitor of how Trump’s orders and actions are impacting planners and planning in America.
The state-sanctioned urbicide of Austin
People don’t kill cities. Freeways do.
US to reduce Colorado River water deliveries to Mexico
A new Colorado Treaty amendment reduces Mexico’s Colorado River water allocation by 250,000 acre feet.
Colorado’s Largest Data Center Could Rise Next to Homes — Without a Public Hearing
The proposed campus would consume 11 times the power of Denver International Airport; as it has across the country, opposition mounts.
5 New England states march closer to 800 megawatt wind energy project
Securing federal approval for the project may be complicated under the Trump administration, which has historically been hostile towards domestic wind power.
Baltimore to break ground on $50 million Transit Priority Project
The project will bring faster bus trips, safer streets and better bike connections to Baltimore.
FREE Course: Walkable City 1: Why Walkability?
After describing his path towards focusing on walkability as the essence of good planning, Jeff Speck marches through his five principal reasons for making more walkable places.
Reinventing Malls: Planning Alchemy—Turning Gray Fields Into Gold
The course focuses on the opportunities and imperatives that shape reinvention of mall sites.
Eagle County Government
Harvard University Graduate School of Design
Nashville Planning Department
The Architects Foundation
University of Cincinnati Online
The Pocatello Development Authority
The Urban Renewal Agency of the City of Pocatello
Journal of the American Planning Association