Porter Wright’s Brad Hughes has engaged in careful consideration of the possible impacts of the Supreme Court ending Chevron deference to federal agencies, following lengthy oral arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce.
Discussions on the issue of agency deference have shed light on the complexities involved in deciding whether unelected agency experts or unelected federal judges should resolve ambiguities in statutes. Many commentators predict that the US Supreme Court will reject Chevron deference entirely. As Hughes examines the potential implications of this for businesses, it is important to consider that abandonment might not have the large-scale impact that some predict.
For example, in Ohio, the state Supreme Court has already expressly rejected Chevron deference and its Auer counterpart, meaning Ohio judges are not required to defer to an agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute or administrative rules.
If the Chevron deference approach is likewise dismissed on a federal level, there may be a silver lining for businesses. A reshaping of the regulatory landscape could present new opportunities and strategies for navigating ambiguity in legislation.
- In terms of pre-litigation opportunities, abandonment of Chevron deference could empower regulated clients to engage more meaningfully with legislators to address ambiguities in bills before they become official laws.
- In a litigation context, the dissolution of Chevron deference might provide more scope for legal counsel to explore and argue using different canons of statutory interpretation. Counsel may also need to scrutinize the Administrative Procedure Act more closely.
While the future of Chevron is still uncertain, it’s clear that there are numerous potential opportunities for legal professionals to leverage, whatever the outcome. The task that lies ahead is to fully comprehend these opportunities and position themselves to take advantage of the new landscape. Further insight will be gleaned when the high court issues its opinion on Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce.
To read Brad Hughes’ full article, visit Bloomberg Law.