The End of Chevron Is Just the Beginning

Introduction

Most Supreme Court decisions have been relegated to a line or two in the business section of the newspaper after a day or two. A few, however, shape the constitutional underpinnings of American government and go on to affect the daily lives of millions of Americans for decades.

The case of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , decided by the Supreme Court in 2024, overruled a long-standing precedent about the relationship between Congress, the federal agencies, and the judiciary. While the immediate implications of the ruling relate to disputes over fishing regulations, this decision has far-reaching effects.

The Court's decision marked the beginning of the end for the era of Chevron deference, the practice that has guided the interactions between the judiciary and administrative agencies for the last four decades. While the immediate implications of the ruling were limited to the dispute over fishing regulations, the Court's decision will affect the balance of power between various government branches. This essay will discuss the changes that the new ruling will bring to the American system of government, as well as the possible arguments for and against them.

A Shift in Constitutional Power

During the last four decades, when faced with ambiguities in legislation, federal judges relied on the rulings established in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (1984). When passed, the ruling provided a practical solution to statutory ambiguities that allowed Congress to rely on the expertise of federal agencies when it could not provide definitive guidance. The new decision, however, ended the era of Chevron deference, returning the responsibility of statutory interpretation to the judges and shifting the balance of power between the different branches of government once again.

The ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U.S. ___ (2024), reflects the Court's belief that its judges, not federal agencies, hold the primary responsibility for interpreting the laws passed by Congress. The decision itself does not remove any authority from the agencies, but it significantly reduces their role in the process of statutory interpretation.

Why This Matters Outside the Courtroom

Immediately after its publication, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U.S. ___ (2024), ruling began to shift the balance of power between various branches of the federal government. At first glance, it might seem that the changes that the decision brought about exist only within the confines of the judiciary. However, the removal of Chevron deference as a consideration affects every aspect of the federal government that relies on statutes interpreted by federal agencies.

Environmental regulations promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency , securities regulations established by the Securities and Exchange Commission , and other rules developed by specialized federal agencies affect all aspects of the economy and everyday life. The assumptions that underpinned Chevron deference allowed these agencies to interpret ambiguous statutes and regulations that are then enforced by federal authorities. Because of Chevron deference, lawsuits challenging the validity of regulations issued by federal agencies were less common, as courts only had to apply the interpretations that agencies had developed. After the decision, federal agencies will find themselves in the direct conflict with the judiciary over the meaning of various pieces of legislation that Congress passes.

Views of the Decision

The supporters of the decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U.S. ___ (2024), argue that it restores the proper balance of power between different branches of government. According to them, the responsibility for interpreting statutes belongs solely to the judiciary, as stated in Article III of the Constitution. By removing Chevron deference, the Court was able to reassert its authority over the agencies and ensure that only the judges held the responsibility for statutory interpretation.

The critics of the decision, on the other hand, argue that the removal of Chevron deference eliminates the expertise of agencies when it comes to statutory interpretation. The specialized knowledge that agencies possess makes them better at interpreting the laws passed by Congress, especially when it comes to matters that require economic and scientific expertise. To return the responsibility of statutory interpretation to the regular judges and presidentially-appointed courts will create inconsistencies and negatively affect the ability of agencies to regulate society effectively.

Why This Matters

The changes brought about by Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U.S. ___ (2024), affect not only the agencies and the judiciary but also the public and the members of Congress. When laws are passed that leave too many details to the agencies, judges can interpret them in a variety of ways. Whether the law deals with artificial intelligence, cryptocurrency, climate change, workplace safety, or public health, the new ruling means that federal judges can invalidate regulations if they disagree with them.

From a general public perspective, the decision changes the way that the United States interacts with various aspects of modern life. The removal of Chevron deference marks the end of the era of federal agencies being the primary defenders of the public interest. Going forward, the agencies will act not as objective regulators that serve everyone but as just another branch of government that seeks to advance its own interests.

From a student's perspective, this essay serves as a vivid illustration of the dynamic nature of the American system of government, as well as the ever-changing relationship between its three branches. Over the past two centuries, the judiciary has clashed with Congress and the presidency on numerous occasions, with each vying for the right to pass and interpret laws. Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U.S. ___ (2024), is only the latest example of the Supreme Court engaging in this centuries-long contest that determines the fate of the republic.

Conclusion

While the decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U.S. ___ (2024), does not change much in terms of the day-to-day activities of the federal agencies, it has far-reaching implications for the balance of power between different branches of government. The new ruling ensures that federal judges hold the final say in disputes concerning the meaning of statutes, but it will take years for the changes to affect every aspect of the American government. One of the most pressing questions that Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo , 603 U.S. ___ (2024), raises is who holds the ultimate authority when it comes to interpreting the laws that govern society: experts within federal agencies or the judges of the Supreme Court?