What Does "New" Mean? Agency Action Post-Chevron

Last term, the Supreme Court handed down its ruling in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. This watershed ruling included the notable line, “Chevron is overruled.” The federal judiciary is now to review agencies’ interpretations of statutes that are “silent or ambiguous” without affording an agency deference. This decision is already affecting administrative law and the review of agency rulemaking. It is being widely cited by both litigants and courts. For example, in U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA, the D.C. Circuit recently held that the EPA misinterpreted the term “new” when it classified certain sources of hazardous air pollutants as “new” rather than “existing.” EPA’s determination to make those “existing” sources accountable for the rule’s stricter regulations for “new” sources was vacated. Join us for a discussion of how Loper Bright has already impacted this and other agency actions, and what else we might expect in a post-Chevron world. Featuring: Prof. Richard Epstein, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of Law and Director, Classical Liberal Institute, New York University School of Law Prof. Andrew Mergen, Emmett Visiting Assistant Clinical Professor of Law in Environmental Law, Harvard Law School Prof. Rob Percival, Robert F. Stanton Professor of Law, University of Maryland Carey School of Law Moderator: Jonathan Brightbill, Former Acting Assistant Attorney General, United States Department of Justice; Partner, Winston & Strawn LLP -- To register, click the link above.