Implications of the Supreme Court Overturning the Chevron Decision, with Daniel Farber

In this week’s episode, host Kristin Hayes talks with Daniel Farber, a professor of law at the University of California, Berkeley, about Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, a Supreme Court case decided earlier this summer that overturned decades of precedent set under a 1984 case that itself led to a legal principle, or doctrine, that people call the Chevron deference. The Chevron deference is a long-standing legal precedent that required courts to defer to the application of laws as interpreted by government agencies if the relevant statute was ambiguous and if the interpretation made by the agency was reasonable. Farber discusses the history of the Chevron deference, the legal arguments that the current Supreme Court justices asserted in the decision that overturned Chevron, and the implications of this decision for future environmental regulation and policymaking. References and recommendations: “Après Chevron, Judges Rule” blog post by Alan Krupnick, Joshua Linn, and Nathan Richardson; https://www.resources.org/common-resources/apres-chevron-judges-rule/ “The Regulatory Review” blog; https://www.theregreview.org/ “Legal Planet” blog; https://legal-planet.org/