On January 17, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in the combined cases Relentless v. Dept. of Commerce and Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. These cases could significantly weaken, or even potentially overturn Chevron deference, a legal doctrine that has been a cornerstone of US administrative law for four decades.
Introduced in 1984, the doctrine directs courts to defer to reasonable interpretations, made by federal agencies, of statutes that are ambiguous or silent with respect to a specific issue. This deference reflects the agency’s expertise and helps navigate legislative gaps. Overturning Chevron would be a shift in administrative law, that would likely weaken the effectiveness of federal agencies to make and enforce rules, while increasing agency oversight by the judiciary.
In this video, we look at the cases before the Court, delve into the origins of Chevron deference, assess its impact on governance, and consider the potential ramifications if it is overturned.
The cases are Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, U.S., No. 22-451 and Relentless Inc, v. Dept. of Commerce, U.S., No. 22-1219.
Featuring:
- Richard Pierce, George Washington University Law School
- Andrew Mergen, Harvard Law School
To contact the producer on this story:
To contact the senior producer responsible for this story: