Goodbye, Chevron. Hello, lawsuits!
3Digest
The Supreme Court's recent decision to overturn Chevron deference, a 40-year-old judicial doctrine, has significantly altered the legal landscape for federal regulations. This decision, stemming from a case involving Loperbright Enterprises, has empowered companies to more readily challenge agency regulations, potentially leading to a surge in lawsuits. The decision has been met with mixed reactions, with some legal experts predicting chaos and others believing it will ultimately lead to a more balanced system where Congress plays a more active role in lawmaking. The impact of this decision is already being felt, with lawsuits targeting regulations in various sectors, including healthcare, education, and labor. For example, a federal court in Mississippi has issued a preliminary injunction against a rule prohibiting discrimination against transgender people in healthcare, citing the Loperbright decision. Additionally, lawsuits have been filed against the Save Plan, a program designed to reduce student loan payments, and against new safety guidelines for workers in heat. While the outcome of these lawsuits remains uncertain, the Loperbright decision has undoubtedly shifted the balance of power, giving companies more leverage to challenge regulations and potentially leading to a more complex and litigious environment for federal agencies.
Outlines
Introduction
This Chapter introduces the topic of Chevron deference and its recent overturning by the Supreme Court. It highlights the potential impact of this decision on businesses and the administrative state.
The Impact of Loperbright on Regulatory Litigation
This Chapter delves into the implications of the Loperbright decision for regulatory litigation. It explains how the decision has empowered companies to challenge agency regulations more effectively, potentially leading to a surge in lawsuits. The chapter also discusses the potential consequences of this shift for the administrative state.
The Role of Congress in Lawmaking
This Chapter explores the role of Congress in lawmaking in the wake of the Loperbright decision. It examines the argument that Congress should play a more active role in defining regulations, but acknowledges the challenges and complexities of this approach. The chapter highlights the limitations of Congress in effectively addressing the intricacies of modern regulations.
The Future of Regulatory Litigation
This Chapter discusses the potential impact of the Loperbright decision on the legal profession, particularly for lawyers specializing in regulatory litigation. It highlights how the decision has increased the likelihood of success for companies challenging regulations, potentially leading to a boom in this area of law.
Keywords
Chevron deference
Chevron deference is a judicial doctrine that gives deference to a federal agency's interpretation of a statute it administers, as long as the interpretation is reasonable. This doctrine was established in the 1984 Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. It has been a cornerstone of administrative law for decades, allowing agencies to interpret ambiguous statutes and implement regulations without excessive judicial scrutiny. However, the Supreme Court's recent decision in the Loperbright Enterprises case has effectively overturned Chevron deference, potentially leading to a significant shift in the balance of power between agencies and the courts.
Loperbright Enterprises
Loperbright Enterprises is a company that was involved in a Supreme Court case that led to the overturning of Chevron deference. The case involved a challenge to a regulation issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Supreme Court's decision in favor of Loperbright Enterprises effectively ended the practice of Chevron deference, giving companies more leverage to challenge agency regulations.
Administrative State
The administrative state refers to the vast network of federal agencies that implement and enforce laws passed by Congress. These agencies play a crucial role in regulating various aspects of American life, from healthcare and education to the environment and financial markets. The Loperbright decision has raised concerns about the future of the administrative state, as it has empowered companies to challenge agency regulations more readily, potentially leading to a more chaotic and less effective regulatory environment.
Regulatory Litigation
Regulatory litigation refers to legal disputes involving the interpretation and enforcement of federal regulations. This area of law has become increasingly important in recent years, as companies have sought to challenge agency regulations that they believe are burdensome or unfair. The Loperbright decision has significantly impacted regulatory litigation, giving companies more leverage to challenge regulations and potentially leading to a surge in lawsuits.
Statutory Interpretation
Statutory interpretation is the process of determining the meaning of a statute or law. This can be a complex process, as statutes are often written in broad terms and may be subject to different interpretations. The Loperbright decision has highlighted the importance of statutory interpretation in regulatory litigation, as it has empowered courts to scrutinize agency interpretations of statutes more closely.
Q&A
What is Chevron deference and how has it been impacted by the Supreme Court's recent decision?
Chevron deference is a judicial doctrine that gives deference to a federal agency's interpretation of a statute it administers, as long as the interpretation is reasonable. The Supreme Court's recent decision in the Loperbright Enterprises case has effectively overturned Chevron deference, giving companies more leverage to challenge agency regulations.
What are the potential consequences of the Loperbright decision for the administrative state?
The Loperbright decision has raised concerns about the future of the administrative state, as it has empowered companies to challenge agency regulations more readily, potentially leading to a more chaotic and less effective regulatory environment.
What are some examples of regulations that are being challenged in the wake of the Loperbright decision?
Regulations being challenged include those related to healthcare, education, and labor. For example, a federal court in Mississippi has issued a preliminary injunction against a rule prohibiting discrimination against transgender people in healthcare, citing the Loperbright decision. Additionally, lawsuits have been filed against the Save Plan, a program designed to reduce student loan payments, and against new safety guidelines for workers in heat.
What is the argument for Congress playing a more active role in defining regulations?
Some argue that Congress should play a more active role in defining regulations, as this would provide greater clarity and reduce the need for agencies to interpret ambiguous statutes. However, this approach faces challenges, as Congress is often unable to reach consensus on complex regulatory issues.
What is the potential impact of the Loperbright decision on the legal profession?
The Loperbright decision has increased the likelihood of success for companies challenging regulations, potentially leading to a boom in regulatory litigation and creating new opportunities for lawyers specializing in this area.
Show Notes
Yesterday, we explained the history that led to this moment. Today, we look at the how the decision will play into a wave of regulatory lawsuits.
Related episodes:
The conservative roots behind the Chevron doctrine (Apple / Spotify)
Could SCOTUS outlaw wealth taxes (Apple / Spotify)
For sponsor-free episodes of The Indicator from Planet Money, subscribe to Planet Money+ via Apple Podcasts or at plus.npr.org.
Music by Drop Electric. Find us: TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Newsletter.
Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoices
NPR Privacy Policy
Table of contents
United States
