An ELI Professional Practice Seminar
In recent years, the Supreme Court has built a significant body of case law further defining the contours of the long-established Chevron doctrine requiring judicial deference to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. In Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, the Supreme Court unanimously reversed a D.C. Circuit decision requiring an agency to provide notice-and-comment opportunities before revising an interpretive rule. In King v. Burwell, the Court held that the IRS had acted permissibly in interpreting a regulation issued under the Affordable Care Act, but notably did not rely on Chevron to defer to the agency’s interpretation. Most recently, in Michigan v. EPA, the Supreme Court again bypassed a Chevron Step 1 analysis and held that by failing to consider costs, U.S. EPA’s decision to regulate mercury emissions for power plants did not meet the “appropriate and necessary” requirement of the Clean Air Act.
What are the implications of these cases for environmental regulation? How do they affect the Supreme Court’s evolving interpretation of the Chevron doctrine? What role will Chevron play in future cases with deep economic and political significance? Our expert panel explored answers to these questions and considered agency deference as it applies to the future of environmental regulation.
Panelists:
Thomas A. Lorenzen, Partner, Crowell & Moring LLP (moderator)
Shannon S. Broome, Partner, Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
Pamela Campos, Attorney, Environmental Defense Fund
Aditi Prabhu, Office of General Counsel, U.S. EPA
Materials:
If you are an ELI member and are logged onto the Members site, you will see links below to available materials from the session. If you are not an ELI member but would like to have access to archived sessions like this one, go HERE to see the many benefits of membership and how to join.