Given the court’s recently expanded view of what presents a “major question,” some attorneys say the conservative-majority court may next take a swipe at Chevron deference all together. The Supreme Court also invoked the “major questions” doctrine in two other cases last session, when it invalidated the Biden administration’s Covid-19 shot-or-test rule and the pandemic eviction moratorium. The Supreme Court earlier this summer affirmed that agencies can’t regulate “major questions” with significant economic or political implications unless Congress explicitly gives them the power to do so, in the West Virginia v. But in “extraordinary cases” of “deep economic and political significance” the courts first apply a separate legal doctrine, the “major questions” doctrine, to see if Congress truly intended to give the agency the power to regulate in that space, before deferring to the agency. Rebecca Rainey: Recent rulings from the US Supreme Court reining in executive agencies’ regulatory authority signal that the high court’s conservative majority could take aim at the legal framework used to determine judicial review, known as the Chevron doctrine next, attorneys say.Īgency decision-making usually gets greater weight when being reviewed by the courts under the Chevron legal doctrine, which says courts should defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of an ambiguous law. Regulating Agency|Pension Bailout Fallout Monday morning musings for workplace watchers.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |