In recent years, Supreme Court justices’ high-profile cases have been a focal point as they decided issues concerning guns, abortion and religion. For the high court’s next term, however, the scale of that administrative law is coming into focus.
The justices this week agreed to take up a case that asks them to overrule a 39-year-old precedent that gives federal agencies deference in rulemaking that Congress hasn’t clearly authorized. The decision could have implications that would limit the executive branch’s authority to implement certain environment, employment, drug and other regulations when the justices decide whether to overrule the court’s 1984 decision in Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, known as the Chevron deference.
Several GW experts are available for comment.
Emily Hammond is a nationally recognized expert in energy law, environmental law, and administrative law. A former environmental engineer, Professor Hammond brings technical fluency to cutting-edge issues at the intersection of law, science, and policy. Professor Hammond has recently been quoted by Law360 and Bloomberg Law in regard to the Chevron hearing.
Jonathan Siegel is the Freda H. Alverson Dean's Research Professor of Law and the F. Elwood and Eleanor Davis Research Professor of Law. His areas of expertise include civil procedure, federal jurisdiction, administrative law, and intellectual property. He recently published an article on the matter, “The Constitutional Case for Chevron Deference."
John Forrer, an associate research professor of strategic management & public policy, is the director of the Institute for Corporate Responsibility at the GW School of Business. His areas of expertise include corporate social responsibility, public private partnerships, and globalization and global governance. He has written about cross-sector collaboration at the global, federal, state, and local levels. While many have framed the issue in terms of, 'a conservative court rolling back regulatory power of the executive branch,' Forrer suggests it’s more about the approach to governance federal agencies have been adopting. He says there are many governance options, each with trade-offs, and there are cross-sector collaboration options that should be considered other than regulatory standards.
Susan Dudley is the director of the George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center and distinguished professor of practice in the Trachtenberg School of Public Policy and Public Administration. She served as the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs from 2007 to 2009. Professor Dudley can provide insight on the potentially significant impact the Supreme Court’s decision could have on federal regulatory policy.
