Karen Kingston's newsletter on Chevron deferrence

Karen Kingston's newsletter on Chevron deferrence

Per SCOTUS Blog, "Justice Roberts rejected any suggestion that agencies, rather than courts, are better suited to determine what ambiguities in a federal law might mean. Even when those ambiguities involve technical or scientific questions that fall within an agency's area of expertise."

Chevron Deference Stripped Courts of Judicial Power, Increased the Power of Government Agencies and Violated the Constitution

In Justice Thomas' concurring opinion, he wrote;

"Chevron deference was "not a harmless transfer of power. The Constitution carefully imposes structural constraints on all three branches, and the exercise of power free of those accompanying restraints subverts the design of the Constitution's ratifiers." In particular, the Founders envisioned that "the courts would check the Executive by applying the correct interpretation of the law."

Chevron was thus a fundamental disruption of our separation of powers. It improperly strips courts of judicial power by simultaneously increasing the power of executive agencies. By overruling Chevron, we restore this aspect of our separation of powers. To safeguard individual liberty, "structure is everything."

Although the Court finally ends our 40-year misadventure with Chevron deference, its more profound problems should not be overlooked. Regardless of what a statute says, the type of deference required by Chevron violates the Constitution.'*

Source:

(*) Karen Kingston's newsletter, 18th June 2024 on Supreme Court's decision.