The Supreme Court ruled Friday on two pivotal cases that strip federal agencies of substantial power to interpret the law.
Supreme Court Justices issued rulings in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce — both challenges to a decades-old precedent that says courts must defer to government agencies’s interpretation of statutes.
The vote was 6-3 in the former and 6-2 in the latter, from which Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson was recused, to overrule the court's 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
Chief Justice John Roberts authored the opinion and Justice Elena Kagan the dissent.
"Rather than safeguarding reliance interests, Chevron affirmatively destroys them," Roberts wrote, "Under Chevron, a statutory ambiguity, no matter why it is there, becomes a license authorizing an agency to change positions as much as it likes."
Kagan condemned the decision in no uncertain terms as blatant power-grab.
ALSO READ: Marjorie Taylor Greene buys condo in 'crime ridden hell hole'
"In one fell swoop, the majority today gives itself exclusive power over every open issue—no matter how expertise-driven or policy-laden—involving the meaning of regulatory law," she writes.
"As if it did not have enough on its plate, the majority turns itself into the country’s administrative czar. It defends that move as one (suddenly) required by the (nearly 80-year-old) Administrative Procedure Act. But the Act makes no such demand. Today’s decision is not one Congress directed. It is entirely the majority’s choice."
