With three new justices on the U.S. Supreme Court, regulated entities have been awaiting guidance on how the new Roberts Court will approach agency-deference principles. Although many court-watchers anticipate a continued movement away from agency deference, the Eighth Circuit’s recent decision in Voigt v. Coyote Creek Mining Company, — F.3d —, 2020 WL 6811356 (8th Cir. Nov. 20, 2020), took agency deference further than the Supreme Court has in the past by deferring to a state agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous federal regulation.
It is well established that under Chevron deference, federal courts defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous federal statute.[1] And under Auer deference, federal courts defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous federal regulation.[2] But the Supreme Court has never before held that deference is appropriate to a state agency’s interpretation of federal law, as the Eighth Circuit held in Voigt.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
