The End of Chevron Deference: What it Mean to Your Cases

In June, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision that upended its 1984 holding in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, which gave rise to the doctrine known as the “Chevron deference.” The precedent held that if federal legislation is ambiguous or leaves an administrative gap, the courts must defer to the regulatory agency's interpretation if the interpretation is reasonable.

The Court’s decision, which held that the Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to exercise their own independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, is expected to usher in a new era of greater scrutiny of federal agencies and perhaps a different approach to lawmaking by Congress.

Our esteemed panelists will break down the Court’s recent holding in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce and leave you with key takeaways and practice tips. How will this ruling impact your practice? Where do we go from here? How do you protect your clients? What are some new opportunities to challenge long-standing rules?

If your practice involves administrative regulations, you won’t want to miss this vital update. Learn how the decision will impact administrative law, legislative lobbying, environmental law, school law, election law and more.