Supreme Court Cases Could Overturn 'Chevron Deference', Redefining Federal Agency Power

The legal doctrine that allows federal agencies to interpret their own authority is under scrutiny, with potential implications for the balance of power in the U.S. government.

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments in two cases that could potentially overturn the 'Chevron deference', a legal doctrine that allows federal agencies to interpret the statutes that give them power.
The doctrine, established in 1984, has been criticized for enabling unelected bureaucrats to determine the limits of their own authority, leading to potential abuses of power.
The cases in question involve the regulation of herring fishermen in New Jersey and Rhode Island, and the authority of the National Marine Fisheries Service to charge fishing companies for the cost of monitors.
Critics argue that overturning the Chevron deference could lead to more accountability and a reduction in the power of the 'administrative state'.
Others warn that discarding the doctrine could result in courts, rather than experts, making key policy decisions, leading to potential judicial overreach.