The Supreme Court will hear two cases this term that could significantly curb the power of federal agencies and alter how administrations govern.
The cases challenge the precedent set in 1984 by Chevron v. NRDC, which found that agencies can interpret ambiguous laws to further administration policy goals.
This has allowed agencies to issue rules with the force of law that extend beyond what is explicitly stated in statutes.
Some of the current conservative justices are skeptical of agencies having broad interpretive powers.
The two cases question whether Chevron deference should be overturned or clarified not to apply to controversial powers granted elsewhere in law.
They involve agencies requiring fishing companies to pay daily monitoring costs not explicitly authorized by statute.
“At long last, on Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear two cases that may signal the beginning of the end to that revolution,” former US assistant attorney general Thomas M. Boyd wrote. (Trending: Boeing Whistleblower Found Dead, Left Behind Chilling Message)
Boyd noted that “All legislative power herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States”—not federal agencies, according to Article I of the Constitution.
A ruling could end the 40-year expansion of agency authority and shift more power back to Congress in setting policy through legislation.
“Forty years of regulatory and judicial tumult have ensued, finally crescendoing to a point that has compelled the Supreme Court to intervene,” Boyd wrote.
Most Popular:
Hidden Camera Exposes Biden Official
Border Patrol Marksman Takes Matters Into His Own Hands
