Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024)

In Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council in 1984, the Supreme Court held that when a statute is ambiguous and the agency administering it has adopted a reasonable interpretation, courts must defer to the agency. Chevron became one of the most cited decisions in American law, allowing agencies to adapt old statutes to new problems and letting new administrations reinterpret the same law. Critics argued it handed judges' core job, saying what the law means, to the executive branch.

The challenge came from Atlantic herring fishermen. A National Marine Fisheries Service rule required some vessels to carry federal monitors and pay for them, at a cost of roughly 700 dollars a day, though the fishing statute did not clearly say the industry must pay. Lower courts deferred to the agency under Chevron. On June 28, 2024, in Loper Bright and a companion case, Relentless v. Department of Commerce, the Supreme Court ruled 6 to 3 to overrule Chevron. Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise independent judgment on all questions of law, though they may still give weight to an agency's expertise.

The Court said past decisions that relied on Chevron remain valid, but agency interpretations going forward must persuade judges rather than merely be reasonable. Justice Elena Kagan's dissent warned that the ruling would shift policy authority from expert agencies to courts. Together with the major questions doctrine, the decision has made it harder for agencies to stretch older statutes to address new issues, and has increased pressure on Congress to write laws with more precision.