Chevron deference is dead, but what's next for regulators? Patrick McLaughlin breaks down the implications of SCOTUS's Loper Bright decision in his latest Third Order piece. https://lnkd.in/eB7bDrnm
Mercatus Center at George Mason University’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
Sharing the message below from one of my K&L Gates partners because the message is perfectly stated (and because it is almost 5pm on Friday and it has been a long week). Check out the latest insights regarding the #Chevron decision by #SCOTUS and sign up for our webinar on Monday!
In the wake of SCOTUS overruling Chevron deference this morning, I have been in awe of my K&L Gates colleagues analyzing the opinion and crafting resources for the benefit of our clients. Our Task Force was primed and ready to go. What's next? Today: Stay tuned for a concise summary Alert on the Loper/Relentless decision with our initial reactions. Monday, July 1st (2-3pm EST): A webinar hosted by the firm. Register HERE - https://lnkd.in/eemTdpFd. Going Forward: A continuing series of practical publications and webinars spanning industries and practice areas.
Chevron Overruled: Understanding the Supreme Court's Decision in Loper Bright/Relentless and What it Could Mean For Regulated Communities
klgates.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Court greenlights Exxon lawsuit against U.S. shareholder over climate proposal; Dutch shareholder escapes The Northern District of Texas allowed Exxon Mobil to proceed with a suit against a shareholder over a withdrawn shareholder proposal on climate action, finding that Arjuna Capital’s withdrawal of the proposal did not moot the case for purposes of subject-matter jurisdiction. The court also determined it had personal jurisdiction over Arjuna, though it lacked personal jurisdiction over Follow This, a Dutch defendant ( Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Arjuna Capital, LLC). Lawsuit against Exxon shareholders. In January, Exxon sued its shareholders Arjuna Capital and Follow This, who filed a non-binding shareholder proposal asking Exxon to accelerate plans to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Exxon’s lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment allowing it to exclude the shareholder proposal from consideration at the company’s annual meeting on May 29, along with attorney fees, costs, and expenses. The shareholders subsequently withdrew the proposal but Exxon continued its lawsuit, arguing that the shareholders could potentially submit similar proposals in the future. The shareholders argued Exxon’s complaint is moot because the proposal is withdrawn and they have agreed not to resubmit it. This story can be read in its entirety on the Wolters Kluwer Vital Law site (no paywall) at https://lnkd.in/gfjYJJ6d. As reported by Lene Powell. #ExxonMobile #ShareholderProposal #ShareholderActivism #ClimateAction #GreenhouseGases
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
-
Senior Fellow, Richman Center at Columbia University, Independent Director & Managing Principal at Broadmoor Consulting
The issue is who gets to decide what a statute means when it is ambiguous, where implementation and enforcement have been delegated to an adminstrative agency. So if you disagree with the agency, you sue in a sympathetic district. The District court in Eastern Texas enjoins nationally and it’s five years before various courts including the Supreme Court decide if the agency’s decision comported with the statute. Of course based on the judges’ extensive knowledge of technology or economics or air pollution or whatever. Everything grinds to a halt. Administrative agencies are unable to function. By the way, when the leadership changes at an agency and it starts doing things your business likes the same dynamic will be used by your opponents. Yes, occasionally the courts will be “right” but at the cost of government dysfunction. Businesses will rue the day this decision came down as predictability and speedy certainty are often important to strategy and execution than the content of a rule. The only winners are ex Supreme Court clerks for the conservative justices now at big law firms in DC. #regulation
"Chevron has proved to be fundamentally misguided," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts. "Experience has also shown that Chevron is unworkable." https://lnkd.in/g2AUpBTm
Supreme Court ends Chevron deference in landmark decision
americanbanker.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
In a 6-3 decision handed down on June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court reversed the Chevron doctrine, a decades-old precedent. The bottom line going forward is that courts, not agencies, have the final say in interpreting statutes. To learn more about what the Court had to say read our latest #LegalAlert authored by Brett Johnson, Ryan Regula, Ryan Hogan, Charlene Warner, Cole Craghan, and Savannah Wix. https://bit.ly/3XQ1hOB #LegalAlert #SCOTUS #ChevronDoctrine
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
-
Save the date! On January 18, join our webinar regarding the fate of Chevron Deference. Dan Jarcho and I will delve into the aftermath of #SCOTUS oral arguments in Loper Bright and Relentless cases, exploring implications for regulated industries. A must-attend for legal insights!
SCOTUS Spotlight: Chevron Deference on the Chopping Block – Pragmatic Pointers About How the Supreme Court May Curtail Overreach by Federal Regulatory Agencies | News & Insights | Alston & Bird
alston.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
It's the end of Chevron deference as we know it, and I feel fine. My latest at the FedSoc blog. https://lnkd.in/gHUYH9jS
Chevron Is Dead, Long Live Chevron
fedsoc.org
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
In an article published by Bloomberg Law, Gary Feldon, Matt Malinowski, and Sebastian Ovalle analyze impact of the Loper Bright ruling, saying that ending Chevron deference also could end Auer deference. The coming days will bring new opportunities to shape the regulatory landscape for businesses and individuals who can clear the APA’s many procedural hurdles, and Hollingsworth LLP is excited to see what this post-Chevron world will bring. #chevron #loperbright #auer #scotus #LitigationMatters
Bloomberg Law: Agency Challengers Get a More Even Playing Field Post-Chevron
https://hollingsworthllp.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
Cultural Excellence Developer | Founder | Committed to inspiring innovation and continuous improvement
⚖️ The Chevron Doctrine Overturned I'm sure you are all are aware, the legal and regulatory landscape has undergone a seismic shift with the recent overturning of the Chevron Doctrine. For nearly four decades, this principle guided how courts interacted with federal agencies, granting them deference in interpreting ambiguous laws. What does this mean? 1. Increased Judicial Role: Courts will now have a more significant role in interpreting laws without deferring to agency expertise. 2. Regulatory Uncertainty: This change could lead to more legal challenges against agency regulations, creating uncertainty in regulatory environments. 3. Impact Across Industries: Industries heavily regulated by federal agencies, such as environmental, financial, and healthcare sectors, may experience increased litigation and shifts in compliance requirements. Implications for Businesses - Legal and Compliance Teams: Must stay vigilant and adapt to potentially more stringent judicial interpretations of regulations. - Strategic Planning: Businesses may need to reassess strategies considering potential regulatory changes and increased scrutiny. - Stakeholder Communication: Keeping stakeholders informed about how these changes might impact operations and compliance is crucial. This landmark decision marks a transformative moment in administrative law. As the implications unfold, it’s essential for businesses and legal professionals to stay informed and proactive. #LegalUpdate #ChevronDoctrine #RegulatoryChanges #Compliance #AdministrativeLaw #EHSPractitioners #EHSProfesionals
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
-
There have been some significant changes in #administrativelaw over the past week that have implications for #transmission planning. This post is a round up of a few key resources to help readers get in the know quickly and walk away with key points. Quick background: The Chevron Doctrine in a nutshell: courts grant deference to an agency's reasonable interpretation regarding ambiguities in statutes that the agency administers. The doctrine gets its name from the 1984 case: Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. This case was overturned on June 28, 2024 by the US Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. In a related but different administrative law development, the Court also said in an opinion issued on July 1, 2024 that plaintiffs can sue over regulations that affect them six years after being affected rather than six years from the regulations being issued. This decision in Corner Post v. the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System therefore takes what was a fixed window and makes it a moving target much farther out into the future. While six years may have been a wait for some additional certainty regarding the durability of regulations, it did provide a bookend. What are the implications? First up, I'm linking to a Utility Dive article by Ethan Howland, and I'll feature that in the image link: https://lnkd.in/ejNmHBdu. This does a nice job of wrapping up some quick takes and key implications. It also quotes a few of my K&L Gates partners: Varu Chilakamarri, formerly of the U.S. Department of Justice, and David Fine - both extremely talented litigators who have seen the evolution of Chevron over the years. As Varu notes: Chevron has been cited over 18,000 times since its inception in the mid-80s, "making it the most cited administrative law case in history." This article is helpful in pulling together recent developments in the courts and at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Commissioner Christie, who issued a strong dissent against #FERC's recent Order No. 1920, notes that 1920 builds on Order No. 1000, which was upheld under Chevron. Note, the Sup. Ct. states that prior decisions that rely on Chevron are not overturned but remain intact under the doctrine of stare decisis - Latin for "let the decision stand" and the basis for building law one on top of the next in the US legal system. Side note for non-lawyers: this is why all the case cites in a brief to a court. Counter to Commissioner Christie, Chairman Willie Phillips issued his own statement of the impact of the Loper Bright decision: https://lnkd.in/exHspZN3 K&L Gates partners Varu Chilakamarri, Mark Ruge, David R. Fine, Tre A. Holloway, and Falco Muscante II provide the concise overview of the Loper Bright decision here: https://lnkd.in/ejahRQvA #energy
Supreme Court’s Chevron, Corner Post decisions could delay energy investments, spur litigation: analysts
utilitydive.com
To view or add a comment, sign in
-
📢Landmark #SCOTUS Decisions Restrain Federal Administrative Agency Power⚖️ The Supreme Court has issued landmark decisions in 𝘓𝘰𝘱𝘦𝘳 𝘉𝘳𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘌𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦𝘴 𝘷. 𝘙𝘢𝘪𝘮𝘰𝘯𝘥𝘰 and 𝘚𝘦𝘤𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘌𝘹𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘷. 𝘑𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘴𝘺, drastically changing the landscape of federal administrative authority. The end of Chevron deference and new limitations on SEC in-house tribunals mark a significant shift in how agencies operate. Read the full update by Husch Blackwell's Gregg Sofer and Joseph Diedrich to understand the implications for businesses: https://lnkd.in/gqZNab-G
To view or add a comment, sign in
-