U.S. Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch will almost certainly be asked at his confirmation hearing next month about his criticism of the Chevron doctrine—the 1984 court-made rule giving deference to executive branch agencies in interpreting ambiguous statutes.
Businesses critical of the regulatory state are keenly interested in the issue. And on Monday the Supreme Court justices rehearsed some aspects of that debate in the unusual context of Esquivel-Quintana v. Sessions, an immigration case in which a California man faces deportation because he was convicted of “sexual abuse of a minor.”
This content has been archived.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]
