On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a pivotal decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, effectively ending the practice of Chevron deference, which had granted federal agencies broad authority to interpret ambiguous statutes they administer. This decision marks a significant shift in the landscape of administrative law, primarily impacting litigants under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
The ruling in Loper Bright hinged on two main points. Firstly, the Supreme Court clarified that the APA does not confer special interpretative authority upon administrative agencies. Secondly, the court reaffirmed the principle of stare decisis, indicating that invoking Chevron doctrine alone is insufficient to revisit established precedent unless a “special justification” exists.
This change creates a more balanced arena for private litigants challenging agency regulations. By removing the automatic deference that courts previously extended to agencies’ interpretations, the decision levels the playing field. This is expected to lead to a rise in challenges to new and existing regulations, as litigants who were previously discouraged by the high bar set by Chevron may now feel emboldened to proceed.
The principle of stare decisis still poses a challenge for potential litigants looking to overturn previous decisions based on Chevron. However, Loper Bright could lower the threshold for courts to find “special justifications” when poor judicial reasoning in past decisions is evident.
The decision also casts uncertainty over other forms of judicial deference to agency interpretations, particularly deference recognized in Auer v. Robbins. Although the Supreme Court limited Auer deference in Kisor v. Wilkie (2019), Loper Bright‘s reasoning against judicial deference could further weaken or even dismantle the Auer precedent.
As the regulatory landscape evolves post-Chevron, legal professionals should closely monitor how courts apply these new principles to both current and precedent cases. The implications for APA litigation are profound, with new opportunities arising for businesses and individuals able to navigate the procedural complexities of the APA.
For further reading and detailed analysis, refer to the original article on Bloomberg Law.