The fate of federal agencies hangs in the balance as the Supreme Court hears cases testing the extent of their regulatory power. At the center of these cases is a 1984 Supreme Court decision, known as Chevron versus Natural Resources Defense Council, which Justice Neil Gorsuch has previously expressed should be overturned. What makes this case particularly intriguing is the familial connection between Justice Gorsuch and the 1984 decision. Gorsuch's mother, Ann Gorsuch, was the former chief of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and her defiant stance against air and water quality regulations in the early 1980s resulted in her being held in contempt of Congress and ultimately led to her resignation.
The 1984 Chevron decision established that when an ambiguous statute is being enforced by a regulator, judges presiding over related lawsuits should defer to the agency's interpretation of the statute, as long as it is deemed reasonable. This is a common occurrence because Congress often crafts broad statutes while entrusting the details of their implementation to regulatory agencies. The Chevron ruling has become one of the most frequently cited cases in the federal courts and at the Supreme Court.
Today, the court is hearing a pair of cases that challenge the scope of federal agencies' regulatory power, particularly in relation to marine fishery policy. The challengers, supported by large businesses within the fishing industry, are urging the court to overturn Chevron. This case has significant implications for numerous industries beyond fishing, including environmental protection, workplace safety, consumer rights, and the pharmaceutical industry, among others.
Justice Gorsuch, along with two other Trump appointees, have been vocal proponents of revisiting the Chevron decision. Gorsuch has criticized the deference given to federal agencies, stating that it has the effect of favoring the government at the expense of individuals and other litigants. With such conservative justices on the bench who are inclined to rollback regulatory powers, it appears that the momentum is in favor of challenging Chevron.
The fact that Justice Gorsuch's mother played a key role in the EPA, which was involved in the 1984 case, adds an intriguing layer to this scenario. Ann Gorsuch's departure from the EPA left a lasting impact on her son, who was just 15 years old at the time. In her memoir, she revealed that her son was deeply upset by her resignation, questioning why she quit when she raised him not to be a quitter. The connection between the family history and the potential future decision adds an interesting dimension to an already significant legal showdown.
While oral arguments have taken place, it remains to be seen how the Supreme Court will rule on these cases that could potentially reshape the regulatory framework governing federal agencies. The decision holds far-reaching consequences for multiple industries impacted by federal regulations, making it a focal point for both businesses and legal experts following the proceedings closely.
