3
OPINION
How the Supreme Court’s overturning of the Chevron deference will impact design firms. Compliance with federal regulations
F or 40 years, federal agencies have interpreted the intent and meaning of the congressional laws they administer and enforce, and courts were required to defer to agency interpretation of ambiguous or silent statutory laws when presiding over legal challenges. In turn, design firms have confidently relied on various federal agencies’ guidelines and interpretations of laws as a routine step of regulatory compliance efforts. A recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling limits agency authority and hands power back to courts, changing the country’s regulatory landscape.
Taylor Dolan
While some view the depowering of federal agencies as a win, others recognize the uncertainty that inevitably results from individual courts, not federal agencies, interpreting ambiguous statutes and the breadth of agency statutory authority. This historic, fundamental shift in our country’s regulatory framework begs the metaphorical question: did the Supreme Court just muddy the waters that some federal agencies are trying to clean up, or did it simply restore the constitutional principle of separation of powers? SEPARATION OF POWERS. The U.S. Constitution establishes three separate, but equal, branches of
government: legislative (makes the law), executive (enforces the law), and judicial (interprets the law). Federal agencies, as part of the executive branch, are responsible for implementing and enforcing laws passed by Congress, i.e. the legislative branch. For decades, under Chevron, federal agencies possessed the power to interpret the laws they administer, and courts, i.e. the judicial branch, were required to defer to agency interpretation of ambiguous laws. Judicial deference to executive interpretation of legislation became known as the Chevron doctrine.
Nathan Greyard
See TAYLOR DOLAN & NATHAN GREYARD, page 4
THE ZWEIG LETTER SEPTEMBER 16, 2024, ISSUE 1553
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker