The conservative court on June 28 struck down a 40-year-old precedent, known as the “Chevron deference,” that had required courts to yield to the “reasonable interpretations” of regulatory officials as they enforced ambiguous federal statutes.
The precedent, stemming from the 1984 case Chevron USA v. Natural Resources Defense Council, allowed agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), to argue that courts should defer to the regulators’ reading of statutes like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act – provided the interpretations are reasonable.
In its 6-3 ruling in Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the nation’s highest court reversed a lower court decision that cited “Chevron” as the rationale to uphold a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration mandate that herring vessels pay the salaries of onboard monitors who protect against overfishing.
Thanks for sharing this. Yes, so many were hurt by this. I love these stories we are all sharing because it shows how wide ranging these regulations have been throughout our country.