Legal professionals, particularly those in large corporations and law firms, may well be aware of an important precedent in administrative law: Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. This Supreme Court decision, which dates back to 1984, introduced the concept of “Chevron deference” into legal parlance.
The essence of “Chevron deference” lies in a two-step process for evaluating an administrative agency’s interpretation of its governing statute. The first step calls for the court to determine whether the provision in question is “clear”. If it is deemed as such, the court follows the explicit terms.
In the forthcoming term, there is an apprehension that Chevron itself may be on the brink. Putting such an established precedent under scrutiny could significantly change the landscape of administrative law. The Supreme Court case that introduced ‘Chevron deference’ involved only a quorum of six justices, the minimum needed.
However, before the legal community moves into a state of undue concern, it is important to reinforce that the reconsideration of such an entrenched precedent should not be carried out hastily. The shift could be revolutionary, but stirring up the established order may not always be necessary or beneficial.
For an in-depth look at the topic, you may refer to the the original article here.