Four justices appeared absolutely determined, on Wednesday, to overrule one of the most consequential Supreme Court decisions in the Court’s entire history.

Chevron v. National Resources Defense Council (1984) is arguably as important to the development of federal administrative law — an often technical area of the law, but one that touches on literally every single aspect of American life — as Brown v. Board of Education (1954) was important to the development of the law of racial equality. Chevron is a foundational decision, which places strict limits on unelected federal judges’ ability to make policy decisions for the entire nation.

As Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said during Wednesday’s arguments, Chevron forces judges to grapple with a very basic question: “When does the court decide that this is not my call?”

And yet, four members of the Supreme Court — Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh — spent much of Wednesday’s arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless v. Department of Commerce speaking of Chevron with the same contempt most judges reserve for cases like Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), the pro-segregation decision rejected by Brown.

The open question is whether the Court’s four most strident opponents of this foundational ruling can find a fifth vote.

None of the Court’s three Democratic appointees were open to the massive transfer of power to federal judges contemplated by the plaintiffs in these two cases. That leaves Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett as the two votes that remain uncertain. To prevail — and to keep Chevron alive — the Justice Department needed its arguments to persuade both Roberts and Barrett to stay their hands.

  • kibiz0r
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    11 months ago

    So, what exactly does the executive branch do anymore, if they overrule this?

    Sounds like government employees couldn’t so much as wipe their ass unless Simon Says.

    • nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      11 months ago

      Plenty of conservatives want this. Or are inextricably convinced that they think they want this, as fine a distinction as that is.

    • Neato@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      It would be hilarious if this was overturned, Biden was elected and he filled the nation with progressive justices. It’d be terrible, but it’s similar to Trump saying the president can’t commit crimes while he isn’t president.

      • Kiernian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 months ago

        It would be hilarious if this was overturned, Biden was elected and he filled the nation with progressive justices.

        …who then use their newfound power to close a crapload of loopholes, then re-write chevron in a way that it can’t be taken down so easily again so it becomes much harder to create more loopholes or abolish good laws when people with bad intentions have power.

        That’d be the best outcome of it getting overturned in my mind, anyway.