SCOTUSBlog

JUNE 27, 2022

Empire Health Foundation, the Supreme Court had yet another chance to topple the Chevron doctrine , a stalwart of administrative law under which courts generally defer to federal agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutes. Share On Friday, in Becerra v. Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the majority.

Government 101

Government Statute Court Administrative Law 101

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

AUGUST 8, 2023

23] The draft rule required them only if they are determined to be “material,” which has led to a considerable amount of confusion. [24] 51] That doctrine only applies to federal regulations, however, not to state statutes, so it does not pose a danger to the two California bills. 24] SB 253 does not require materiality.

Laws 98

Laws Law School Government Legal 98

SCOTUSBlog

JANUARY 16, 2024

Justice John Paul Stevens set out a two-part test for courts to review an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers. If it has not, the court must uphold the agency’s interpretation of the statute as long as it is reasonable.

Stare Decisis 145

Stare Decisis Court Statute Government 145

ClimateChange-ClimateLaw

JULY 2, 2021

The third-party complaint asserted that while the plaintiffs’ claims were meritless, Statoil, “as well as potentially the many other sovereign governments that use and promote fossil fuels,” must be joined as third-party defendants. Chevron filed similar notices of withdrawal in other cases brought by California localities.

Court 45

Court Statute Litigation Litigating 45