Skip to comments.Will the Supreme Court Trim Chevron’s Sails?
Posted on 09/08/2023 12:24:28 PM PDT by CFW
Family-run fishing businesses face a fraught and competitive environment, even independent of burdensome regulations. But one such outrageous regulation is now before the Supreme Court, in a case with significance far beyond our nation’s fisheries.
The National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), part of the Department of Commerce, promulgated a rule that pertains to most herring boats, such as those portrayed in the Oscar-winning movie CODA. If a vessel is determined to need a federal monitor and has not already been assigned one under a federally funded program, it must pay for the monitor itself. The cost of doing that for most herring boats exceeds $710 per sea day.
Four family-owned and -operated fishing companies contend that the industry-funding requirement—not explicitly authorized by the 1976 Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act—will have a devastating economic impact on the herring fleet and will disproportionately affect small businesses, destroying historic communities. They sued the government to get the rule voided as beyond NMFS’s lawful authority.
Chevron deference rests on the presumption that Congress won’t over-delegate and that agencies will be loyal agents. But the past 40 years have shown that Congress loves passing the buck and that agencies are actually principals who pursue their own interests. The time has come for the Court to revisit Chevron, whether it chooses to overrule it explicitly or keep it nominally under a newly restricted standard. Indeed, the Court did the latter in the 2019 case Kisor v. Wilkie, where it preserved judicial deference to agency reinterpretation of its own regulations as devised in the 1997 case Auer v. Robbins. Kisor reworked Auer deference so completely that both Chief Justice John Roberts, who joined Kagan’s majority opinion, and Kavanaugh, who joined Gorsuch’s effective dissent, noted that there wasn’t much difference between Kagan’s explication and Gorsuch’s evisceration.
(Excerpt) Read more at city-journal.org ...
It will and it scares the poop out of the Left.
City Journal does good work.
Thanks for posting this. It sheds a lot of light — and it’s *concise*.
“City Journal does good work.
Thanks for posting this. It sheds a lot of light — and it’s *concise*.”
Something we see so little of these days.
This government is involved in everything and needs to be reigned in.
We are in a bad way.
What the court should do, is declare that the presumption is always that the government is overreaching and that they must prove that they are not.
We know that they are far-left wingnut, black-robed tyrants but who died and left those “jugheads” in charge? The most dangerous thing threatening the RATS’ democrazy are all these friggin’, Neanderthal “jugheads” running around. Especially the bimbos from Jamaica and India. Who scratched the dots off of their foreheads anyway?
It is a horrible discussion that simply glosses over the actual legal issues presented in the cases cited leaving the reader to undertake the actual legal research that was the authors’ burden when they undertook to write this in the first place. This poor framing of a legal issue would get a first year law student a failing grade anywhere except Harvard and maybe Yale.
This case is probably the most important in years. It may be our last chance to declaw the Government agencies.
Scotus has done irreparable harm to our republic.
The Chevron doctrine is destined to the ash heap of history.
Easy 6-3 decision.
That’s why they need to pack the court.