On January 17, the US Supreme Court began hearing oral arguments for two notable cases: Relentless v. Department of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Legal professionals view these as opportunities for the current court to rethink the judicial doctrine of Chevron deference, which guides courts to defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes.
The principle of Chevron deference, established through the Supreme Court’s 1984 verdict in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, remains as one of the major cornerstones of administrative law history. The two cases coming to attention, relate to a rule by the National Marine Fisheries Service, which mandates private fishing vessels to shoulder the cost of federal observers on their crafts.
The appeal from the fishing companies has led to the overarching question of whether Chevron deference should be outright dismissed, or merely limited in its scope through a narrow ruling. The ensuing impacts of the court’s decision could cause a chain reaction of challenges to agency actions and regulations, and influence future rule writing methods by agencies.
The concern of an ensuing flood of litigation is critically underlined. For instance, one case that serves as a precursor to these legal challenges is the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) proposed rules on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, including in particular, the EPA’s September 2022 proposal to categorize two PFAS as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. Once finalized, the rule-making would undeniably face challenges, and the removal of Chevron deference might present another ground for contesting EPA’s regulation based upon its interpretation of CERCLA.
The judgement from the high court, to be rolled out this term, may be regarded as either affirming the line drawn by the Chevron Court in identifying delegation as proposed by US Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, or simply, as per Paul Clement, the necessity of good old-fashioned statutory interpretation.
The cases at hand are Relentless v. Department of Commerce, U.S. No. 22-1219, and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, U.S., No. 22-451, argued on January 17.
The full coverage of this important turn of events in administrative law is detailed in this article by Jessica Rosell, Jackson Hobbs, and Gillian Wener of Lathrop GPM.