Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Supreme Court hears oral argument in Loperbright v. Raimondo over Chevron deference
Summary
At oral argument in Loperbright Enterprises v. Raimondo, petitioner counsel urged the Court to abandon Chevron deference—saying it lets agencies impose heavy costs on small fishermen—while the government defended Chevron as consistent with statutory delegation and urged narrower fixes.
The Supreme Court on argument in Loperbright Enterprises v. Raimondo considered whether courts should continue to defer to federal agencies under the Chevron framework or instead undertake de novo statutory interpretation.
Mister Clement, counsel for the petitioners, told the justices that Chevron’s two-step test has produced “reliance-destroying” results and allows agencies to shift heavy costs onto regulated parties. Clement said the case illustrates that agencies required fishermen to carry federal monitors on 50% of trips at costs the petitioners say could amount to as much as 20% of annual returns, while Congress had elsewhere capped industry-funded monitoring fees at 2 percent to 3 percent of the value of the catch. “The Chevron two-step has to…
Already have an account? Log in
Subscribe to keep reading
Unlock the rest of this article — and every article on Citizen Portal.
- Unlimited articles
- AI-powered breakdowns of topics, speakers, decisions, and budgets
- Instant alerts when your location has a new meeting
- Follow topics and more locations
- 1,000 AI Insights / month, plus AI Chat