[Blaze] On Monday, the court granted review of Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.The case was brought by herring fishermen in New England, challenging the National Marine Fisheries Service's authority to force them to carry a monitor on their vessels who ensures the fishermen comply with federal regulations. Not only do fishermen not have a say in whether monitors are placed on their vessels, but they are forced to pay the monitor's salary.
The industry estimates the regulations reduce their profits by 20%.
What is the significance of the case?
The Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari to answer the following question:
Whether the Court should overrule Chevron or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency.
The case, then, could gut the Chevron doctrine, established by the landmark Supreme Court case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. in 1984.
"In Chevron, the Supreme Court set forth a legal test as to when the court should defer to the agency’s answer or interpretation, holding that such judicial deference is appropriate where the agency’s answer was not unreasonable, so long as Congress had not spoken directly to the precise issue at question," Cornell Law explains.