Regulation Vol. 41 No. 4

Winter 2018–2019

The word is out: the Supreme Court is poised to roll back the Chevron doctrine. Set out in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984), the opinion states that when Congress has not “spoken directly to the precise question at issue,” a court reviewing an agency action “may not substitute its own construction of a statutory provision for a reasonable interpretation made by … the agency.” That gives agencies more flexibility in making law by issuing regulations. In this issue of Regulation, law professor David Schoenbrod argues that the Court should ground any modification of Chevron on the constitutional norm that the “lawmakers” elected by the governed—that is, members of Congress—should take responsibility for the laws.

Media Name: winter-2018-2019-cover.png