On the surface, a dispute over whether small fishing businesses should be required to pay for onboard monitors to observe their catch would not appear to be a potential game-changer for administrative law. But when the Supreme Court recently granted the certiorari petition in Loper Bridge Enterprises v. Raimondo, it was the clearest indication to date that the new conservative majority was prepared to revisit, if not abandon, the long-standing “Chevron deference” principle. For almost 40 years, federal agencies have been granted general deference in exercising the scope of their regulatory authority, based on the Court’s ruling in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council. However, the scope of this deference has diminished. It has long been assumed that the current Court was looking for a matter in which to further reconsider the scope of the Chevron ruling. The Loper case most likely presents that opportunity.
Please join leaders from a variety of Venable’s administrative law practices for a discussion of the significance of this Supreme Court case, and the role that industry groups may choose to play in arguments before the Court.
Craig A. Gilley, Partner, Venable LLP
Jay C. Johnson, Partner, Venable LLP
Fred R. Wagner, Partner, Venable LLP
Laura A. Rich, Counsel, Venable LLP