An upcoming SCOTUS case provides an opening for greater dispute over the power of regulatory agencies.
Rejecting EPA’s ability to reshape the coal industry, the Court forecasts invalidating future agency actions.
Three takeaways follow from the Supreme Court’s recent opinions ignoring Chevron v. NRDC.
In rejecting agency action on the basis of the “major questions doctrine,” judges undermine congressional policies.
Another regulatory approach to mandate vaccines could have withstood judicial scrutiny.
Scholar argues that overruling deference to agencies will constrain U.S. government action.
With two Medicare cases, the U.S. Supreme Court may change an important rule on deference to agency decisions.
Courts should not rely on the number of public comments to assess the legality of regulations.
Two scholars argue that immigration adjudication should no longer be afforded Chevron deference.
Deregulatory attacks have twisted a legal concept meant only to restrain extraordinary actions.
The Supreme Court’s recent Weyerhaeuser decision will add to the administrative costs of protecting endangered species.
The Supreme Court preserved agency deference in Kisor v. Wilkie.