Lawfare Daily: The Supreme Court Takes the Bait: Loper Bright and the Future of Chevron Deference
Jul 12, 2024
auto_awesome
Law professors Bridget Dooling and Nick Bednar discuss the recent Supreme Court decision overturning the Chevron doctrine, exploring the implications for administrative law. They delve into the Loper Bright case, agency interpretations, deference standards, and the broader impact on separation of powers. The podcast also touches on online privacy protection with Delete Me and analyzes the Corner Post decision's effects on administrative law and presidential authority.
The Supreme Court's recent decisions show skepticism towards administrative agencies, emphasizing a need to limit agency power.
Loper -Bright overturning the Chevron deference doctrine shifts focus on deference to agency interpretations, impacting challenges to agency rules.
Deep dives
The Supreme Court's Impact on Administrative Law
The Supreme Court's recent decisions show a skepticism towards administrative agencies while also empowering the presidency. Key cases like Loper -Bright and Corner Post highlight how the Court aims to limit agency power while increasing presidential authority. This tension reflects a broader debate on the role of the administrative state and the separation of powers.
Loper -Bright: Overturning Chevron Deference
Loper -Bright overturned the Chevron deference doctrine, shifting the focus to the deference given to agency interpretations of statutes. The ruling raises questions about when courts should defer to agency interpretations and how the decision impacts challenges to agency rules. The case signals a shift in the court's stance on administrative agency power.
Corner Post vs. Federal Reserve: Statute of Limitations
The Corner Post vs. Federal Reserve case addressed the starting point for the six -year statute of limitations on agency actions. The ruling expands the window for challenging agency rules, allowing individuals injured by rules, even years later, to challenge their validity. This decision significantly impacts the ability to challenge long-standing agency rules.
Implications for Executive Power and Congressional Action
The Supreme Court's approach to administrative law reflects a balance between restricting agency power and empowering the presidency. By emphasizing skepticism towards agencies and supporting presidential authority, the court urges Congress to engage in legislative action. The decisions highlight the court's role in interpreting statutes and overseeing the executive branch's actions, shaping the landscape of administrative law.
Alan Rozenshtein, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School and Senior Editor at Lawfare, and Molly Reynolds, Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution and Senior Editor at Lawfare, spoke with Bridget Dooling, Assistant Professor of Law at The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law, and Nick Bednar, Associate Professor of Law at the University of Minnesota Law School, about the Supreme Court's recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overruled the decades-long Chevron doctrine that required courts to defer to reasonable interpretations of their statutes.