Supreme Court Considers Overturning Chevron Doctrine in Landmark Fishermen Case

The case brought by commercial fishermen could significantly impact the power of federal agencies to interpret and enforce laws.

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering a case brought by commercial fishermen from New Jersey and Rhode Island, challenging a regulation that requires them to pay for observers to ensure compliance with federal regulations at sea.
The case, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, could potentially overturn a 1984 legal precedent known as Chevron, which states that federal courts must defer to regulatory agencies when a law is ambiguous.
The fishermen argue that the cost of observers, which can reach $700 a day, is financially unfeasible and unfair. They also contend that the Fisheries Service overstepped its authority by requiring them to pay for the observers.
Conservative groups, including those funded by billionaire Charles Koch, are backing the fishermen, arguing that the Chevron doctrine gives agencies too broad a power to define laws.
If the Supreme Court decides to scrap the Chevron doctrine, it could significantly impact multiple agencies that rely on their own experts to interpret and enforce federal laws.