U.S. Supreme Court term ends by gutting government agencies

By Ivan Sanchez

The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent 6-2 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo marks a significant shift in administrative law, potentially limiting government policymakers’ ability to address critical national issues.

Chevron deference, established in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (1984), allowed appellate courts to defer to an agency’s reasonable interpretation of its governing statute. However, this principle was overturned in the Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo decision, reinstating de novo review for all statutory interpretation questions. Under this new standard, appellate courts can freely substitute their own interpretation of a statute for that of the agency, potentially undermining regulatory actions and policies.

“The only effective way to address these issues is through regulatory law implemented by administrative agencies,” said Professor Ed Rubin, distinguished university professor of Law and Political Science at Vanderbilt University. “Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, along with other decisions this term like Corner Post and Jarkesy, is designed to impede that process.”

“This decision echoes the now-abandoned substantive due process cases of the Lochner Era (1905-1937),” Rubin noted, “when the Court attempted to block Progressive Era legislation to protect the privileges of the economic elite.”

Rubin highlighted Tennessee’s particular vulnerability to reduced federal regulatory oversight, citing concerns over climate change, high rates of gun violence and incarceration, and disparities in healthcare quality.

“We are one of the states that will be virtually uninhabitable if global warming continues unabated,” Rubin emphasized. “Memphis is the most dangerous city in the U.S., with Chattanooga and Nashville also ranking high in crime rates. Tennessee ranks 46th in the Commonwealth Fund’s ranking of healthcare quality.”

Rubin said that disadvantaged communities, particularly those with a history of discrimination, often rely on regulatory and benefit programs to address systemic inequalities.

“Federal intervention has historically been crucial for Tennessee, especially for its Black and Brown populations,” Rubin added. “Any disadvantaged community tends to benefit from regulatory and benefit programs aimed at remedying inequalities.”

The decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo raises concerns about the future of regulatory actions and their impacts on disadvantaged communities. It underscores the ongoing debate over the role of administrative agencies in shaping national policy and addressing societal challenges.