Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administrative Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill to remove deference to administrative rulings
Summary
The Senate State Government Committee gave a favorable report to Senate Bill 248, which would remove a judicial presumption of deference to administrative-agency findings and require courts to review agency decisions on the merits.
The Senate State Government Committee approved Senate Bill 248 at its meeting, advancing a measure that would eliminate a judicial presumption of deference to administrative-agency findings and require courts to consider such decisions "afresh, based on the facts and the law."
Senator Orr, sponsor of Senate Bill 248, told the committee the bill responds to changes in U.S. Supreme Court precedent. "The U. S. Supreme Court back in the 80s had a case called Chevron case where they basically said that, as government agencies make decisions...the court system was to give all due deference to the ruling or the findings of the agency," Orr said. He added that a decision last year in a case the transcript names "Loper Bridal Enterprises" overturned that practice and that the bill "takes 1 paragraph out and puts 1 paragraph in and, basically takes away the...deference or the the deferral it would give to the administrative ruling and looks at it afresh, based on the facts and the law."
The committee voted to give the bill a favorable report. Senators recorded as voting "aye" during the roll call included Senator Coleman; Senator Coleman Madison; Senator Elliott; Senator Kelly; Senator Orr; Senator Roberts; and Senator Butler. The chair announced, "The ayes win." The motion recorded was to issue a favorable report; the transcript does not specify the motion mover or seconder by full name.
The bill, as described in committee, would remove a statutory paragraph that the sponsor said previously produced deference to agency findings. The transcript does not include the bill text or the specific statutory citation being amended; committee members did not read the revised paragraph aloud during the recorded discussion.
Committee discussion on the measure consisted primarily of the sponsor's explanation of the policy purpose and a short question period. No formal amendments were recorded in the transcript. The committee record indicates the bill will proceed according to the chamber's next steps for reported measures.
