United States Supreme Court Overturns Chevron

On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court of the United States delivered its decision on Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, overturning the long-standing Chevron deference doctrine established by the Court’s decision in Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council Inc. et al, 467 U.S. 837 (1984).

The Chevron doctrine allowed agencies to create law in various sectors of the federal government (most notably in the environmental, health, labor, consumer protections, and financial sector), and required courts to defer to “permissible agency interpretations” even when the reviewing court had a different interpretation of the same.  Under the ruling in Loper Bright,federal courts are no longer allowed to defer to agency interpretations of the applicable law when there is an ambiguity. However, courts may still review the agency’s interpretation and consider that in their interpretation of the same.

Proponents of the Loper Bright decision believe this will provide clarity to interpretations of federal agency statutes, rules and regulations.  However, those critical of the ruling have concerns that these agencies employ experts who provide the necessary guidance and interpretation of the respective agency’s law and the courts will not have the same level of expertise to accurately interpret the same.

While the recent ruling in Loper Bright does not apply to any prior court rulings that relied on the Chevron deference doctrine, it will likely result in the commencement of a slew of litigations to clarify ambiguities in administrative statutes and associated rules and regulation going forward.  The threat of impending litigation will likely have a chilling effect on agencies’ aggressive approach during future rulemaking processes. 

The Wagoner Firm will continue to monitor any news or updates regarding this decision and any future decisions made by the courts affected by the ruling in Loper Bright. We remain committed to assisting our clients with any questions or concerns they may have regarding the interpretation of federal laws and federal agency regulations arising from said laws.