Supreme Court Decision Restricts Federal Agencies’ Power

In a significant ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court has issued a decision that significantly limits the authority of federal agencies to interpret the laws they enforce, leading to a shift where courts are advised to rely on their own interpretations of ambiguous statutes.

The 6-3 vote by the justices overturned the 1984 Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. decision that introduced the Chevron doctrine, requiring courts to defer to agency interpretations of statutes if they were deemed reasonable in the absence of explicit congressional guidance.

Chief Justice John Roberts authored the 35-page verdict, deeming the Chevron doctrine as ‘fundamentally misguided,’ with Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting.

Advocates argued against the doctrine, including attorney Roman Martinez, representing one of the litigants, while Kym Meyer of the Southern Environmental Law Center criticized the ruling, saying it falls short in providing consistency needed for federal laws on technical matters.

The decision impacts the ability of agencies like the National Marine Fisheries Service to independently interpret laws and regulations, signaling a new era where courts are entrusted with resolving such statutory ambiguities.

The Court also recently addressed funding for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Securities and Exchange Commission‘s enforcement procedures, marking a series of conservative challenges aimed at reducing administrative control.