MicroWave OP , 2 months ago

FWIW the most recent analysis I came across from a law professor makes me think the emergence of the “major questions doctrine” is more concerning:

In https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/LoperBrightEnterprisesetalPetitionersvsGinaRaimondoSecretaryofCom?doc_id=X1Q6OHE0D7O2, the US Supreme Court will decide whether to overrule one of its most frequently cited precedents—its 1984 opinion in https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/Chevron_U_S_A_Inc_v_Natural_Resources_Defense_Council_Inc_467_US_?doc_id=X5CAVA. The decision in Loper may change the language that lawyers use in briefs and professors use in class, but is unlikely to significantly affect case outcomes involving interpretation of the statutes that agencies administer. In practice, it’s the court’s new major questions doctrine announced in 2021 that could fundamentally change how agencies operate.

…

I am much more concerned about the court’s 2021 decision to create the “major questions doctrine” and to apply it in four other cases than I am about the effects of a potential reversal of Chevron in Loper. Lower courts are beginning to rely on the major questions doctrine as the basis to overturn scores of agency decisions. That doctrine has potential to make it impossible for any agency to take any significant action.

news.bloomberglaw.com/…/courts-new-chevron-analys…