They Finally Killed Chevron Deference
Added 2024-07-12 08:40:38 +0000 UTCOA1050
Legal podcaster Charles Star (ALAB, Mic Dicta) joins to share his administrative law expertise as we consider the end of the Chevron doctrine and what comes next. Why is everyone so worked up about the overturning of a ruling reached by a conservative SCOTUS at the behest of Ronald Reagan, Neil Gorsuch's mom, and one of the worst polluters in world history? Why are immigration lawyers (including Matt) quietly celebrating the end of deference to administrative agencies? And how might a lesser-noticed decision from the last day of the Supreme Court’s term fuel a new era of challenges to administrative regulations?
Comments
There wasn't any talk of court docket size and judges workload. Andrew liked to talk about that. Maybe it's too hard to predict but won't this cause issues with a massive workload being transferred to lower courts?
Matthew Williams
2024-07-14 18:51:41 +0000 UTCThat's right! I actually remembered that they changed it to make it simpler but... still could not remember what it was haha
Opening Arguments
2024-07-14 17:23:46 +0000 UTCThere was a throwaway joke on Thomas' part about inserting the suicide prevention hotline later in the edit. Totally makes sense as a joke prior to 2022, but it kind of falls flat now. Why? Because since July 2022 there's a national number that's super easy to remember! 988! It's important to get the word out and make it's presence as mundane as 911; its one of the ways we can guarantee people are getting help not cops. But we've been bad about marketing it. But for future reference: the national suicide prevention hotline is 988. No need to dub!
Despairing Radical
2024-07-13 21:51:18 +0000 UTCThis guest is amazing. Great substantive knowledge and great "cultural fit"
Vehicular Man's Laughter ... Oh I just realized it's 'car' from WTW ... he's so good at Codenames he can play it blind
2024-07-12 21:19:18 +0000 UTCExcellent guest balancing law nerdiness and intelligence. Really great convo/banter!
Tim H
2024-07-12 18:47:43 +0000 UTCI'd love to hear more about that in the future!
Drew Vogel
2024-07-12 17:28:04 +0000 UTCI'd agree with all of that. One thing I was wishing that I had said more clearly that people may not realize is that "Brand X" deference (which I mentioned in passing here) gives agencies like the Board of Immigration Appeals final say in their decisions to the point that they can overrule federal circuit courts. There are multiple examples of even the 5th Circuit doing the right thing on an immigration question only to be overruled by the BIA, often in extreme and outrageous ways which I should probably get into another time.
Matt Cameron
2024-07-12 16:20:19 +0000 UTCLol you were not lying about the pessimism 😂.
Aminah
2024-07-12 15:45:19 +0000 UTCI also really enjoyed this guest!
Cerulean
2024-07-12 14:35:27 +0000 UTCMic Dicta, it’s a podcast. I’m yet unclear on the connection between it and the ALAB podcast, since I’m new to both.
Cerulean
2024-07-12 14:34:58 +0000 UTCAnd I say that as a very intense Matt stan so that is high praise. I love regular eps with Matt and Thomas but this is some seasoning that I'd absolutely eat more of
Jess C
2024-07-12 14:32:21 +0000 UTCOmg LOVE this guest! I've immediately subscribed to the ALAB podcast! This Chevron decision has been discussed a lot and I listened out of love of OA not necessarily expecting much new but this felt like a refreshing take. I hope you get this guest back!
Jess C
2024-07-12 14:31:34 +0000 UTCNo surprise Matt and Thomas like Chevron going away. It's going to make so many more confusing and conflicting legal decisions that need explaining. This is great for Big Podcast! Seriously though, I think this is another example of legally specific definitions for common words leading to confusing press coverage. Chevron said the court had to side in favor of the agency in many cases. The press coverage strongly suggests that the agencies no longer have the power to interpret ambiguous laws. After listening to this episode it seems like this means many cases will progress further and it will empower corrupt judges but fair courts are still quite likely to side with the agency interpretation after hearing the case. To me it seems like a benefit of this is that many agency decisions will be cosigned by courts and thus more likely to be stable. In other words, Chevron deference has hid agency interpretations from the sunshine of judicial review and in effect made them easier to wash away by the next administration. Am I wildly off here?
Drew Vogel
2024-07-12 13:40:55 +0000 UTCWould love to see episodes with Tarik, Andy and Tim as well!
Will Sundstrom
2024-07-12 13:28:17 +0000 UTCCrap. Autocorrect. FUND THE AGENCIES!!
Katie Byrum
2024-07-12 13:11:28 +0000 UTCFind the agencies!!!!
Katie Byrum
2024-07-12 13:10:40 +0000 UTCIf (pessimistic it will happen) we end up getting a Thomas/Alito impeachment- would love some coverage💕
Reese
2024-07-12 12:49:44 +0000 UTCWhat/who did Matt say he liked .... Mike Dicta? Cannot find.
Navi Girl
2024-07-12 12:42:28 +0000 UTCHell yes, Charles! First ALAB returns and now we get the crossover we've all been waiting for!
Will Sundstrom
2024-07-12 12:24:46 +0000 UTCI’m not sure how much more bad news I need to be fully cognizant of… :(
Jen Lytle
2024-07-12 09:11:58 +0000 UTC
