Ranking Member Scott on SCOTUS Striking Down Chevron Deference
“By eliminating Chevron deference, the Supreme Court has effectively taken steps to further politicize the courts and cripple the nation’s regulatory systems - a ruling that will no doubt have disastrous consequences for Americans.”
WASHINGTON – Today, Ranking Member Robert C. “Bobby” Scott (VA-03) released the following statement after the Supreme Court ruled in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce to strike down the longstanding doctrine of Chevron deference. For the past 40 years, Chevron deference required courts to defer to an agency interpretation of the law if the statute was ambiguous and if the interpretation was reasonable.
“Today, the Supreme Court upended 40 years of administrative jurisprudence and limited government agencies’ ability to regulate in their areas of expertise and properly serve the American people.
“In the landmark 1984 case Chevron U.S.A Inc. v. NRDC, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously in favor of a two-step legal framework for a Court to determine the interpretation of an ambiguous statute by deferring to the relevant agency experts. By eliminating Chevron deference, the Supreme Court has effectively taken steps to further politicize the courts and cripple the nation’s regulatory systems – a ruling that will no doubt have disastrous consequences for Americans.
“Today’s decision has taken a wrecking ball to the regulatory systems that have served our country for decades. Agency interpretation of vague statutes is necessary to ensure Americans across the country can have reassurance that their food and medication is safe for consumption, workplaces are safe and secure, student borrowers are not defrauded, and so much more.
“Without Chevron deference, we must rely on Congress or the courts to regulate complex policy issues, without the expertise or technical assistance of the agencies that are responsible for implementing the law. The issues at stake often involve very technical questions such as, what constitutes a significant risk to workers' health from a cancer-causing chemical, what kind of job is too hazardous for children to be allowed to do, or how far a septic tank should be from a tree. We are now at greater risk of falling into politicized legal battles wherein bad actors can use the courts to push their own political regulatory agenda.
“I am extremely concerned by today’s ruling, and I will continue to fight for the American people to have access to safe and affordable services.”
###
Press Contact
Democratic Press Office, 202-226-0853
Next Article Previous Article