Jonathan D. Brightbill, partner with Winston & Strawn. Courtesy photo
The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Chevron v. NRDC (1984) is a longstanding source of controversy. Some proponents of the doctrine argue that it facilitates our Constitution’s separation of powers. This deference doctrine puts administrative agencies, under the control of our democratically elected president, ahead of unelected judges when interpreting ambiguous statutes to implement policy. Others, including Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, endorse broad agency delegation because “members of Congress often don’t know enough—and know they don’t know enough—to regulate sensibly on an issue.”
In West Virginia v. EPA, a case decided on the last day of its 2021-22 term, the Supreme Court issued its most significant administrative law decision in years. Although only passingly mentioned, West Virginia effectively modifies Chevron’s well-known two-step analytical framework.
This content has been archived.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]
