House Votes to Overturn Supreme Court Ruling That Gave Executive Branch Too Much Regulatory Power

The bill aims to overturn the 1984 Supreme Court ruling, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.

QUICK FACTS:
  • The U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday voted to overturn a Supreme Court ruling that lawmakers said gave the executive branch too much regulatory power.
  • The 1984 case Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. set the precedent whereby courts yield to federal agencies’ interpretations of laws if there is ambiguity in a statute.
  • “Congress’s explicit intent reigns supreme, and agencies’ reasonable interpretations of any gaps follow,” according to the National Constitutional Center’s summary of the case.
  • As Fox News reported, Republicans believe “courts have failed to do their due diligence in assessing whether those regulations can be fairly justified under the law” since the initial Chevron ruling.
  • Therefore, as a means of challenging the Chevron ruling, the House passed the Separation of Powers Restoration Act (H.R. 288), allowing federal courts to review all areas of a law’s implementation without deferring to a federal agency’s interpretation.
  • Advocates of overturning the Chevron precedent argue that the judicial branch should be able to make decisions on cases without being obligated to accept a federal agency’s interpretation of a law, whereas those desiring to uphold the Chevron precedent believe Supreme Court is not equipped to establish regulations.
  • The bill was approved in the House on mostly party lines, 220-211, but is unlikely to move forward in the Democrat-majority Senate.
  • A current case within the Supreme Court may end the Chevron precedent, should the SOPRA bill fail in Congress.
  • The Supreme Court is slated to hear a case between New Jersey fishermen and the federal government over whether or not federal rules on fishermen are extending beyond Congressional intent. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the fishermen, the Chevron precedent would be overturned.
  • If the Chevron precedent is overturned, judicial authorities cannot defer to an agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statute, likely resulting in businesses having a greater opportunity to succeed in court when challenging an agency.
REPRESENTATIVES RESPOND TO THE BILL:
  • Representative Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI), the sponsor of the bill, explained in a press release that “Government works best when it can be held accountable.”
  • “Unfortunately, unelected bureaucrats in our agencies wield far more power than intended because of mandated deference, like Chevron, during judicial review,” the press release continued. “This legislation restores Congress’s authority as the branch that makes the laws and the judiciary as the branch to interpret and enforce them.”
  • Texas Congressional Representative Jodey Arrington (R) shared a similar sentiment to Rep. Fitzgerald, stating in a press release that the “Constitution was clear: Congress shall have the power to legislate, and the judiciary shall have the power to review. The Separation of Powers Restoration Act would strengthen the walls of power between our branches of government while preventing federal agencies from creating laws through regulatory action.”
  • “This bill restores the Constitutional role of our Legislature and Judiciary as the Founders intended,” Arrington said.
  • Other representatives believe the Chevron precedent should be maintained.
  • Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) holds that the bill will “completely upend the administrative process by eliminating judicial deference to agencies and require federal courts to review all agency rulemakings and interpretations of statute on a de novo basis.”
  • In describing his opposition to the SOPRA bill, Nadler stated, “While Congress sets broad policies, we delegate authorities to executive agencies because we do not have the expertise to craft the technical regulations ourselves, and we rely on these agencies to carry out the policies we enact.”
BACKGROUND:
  • The House of Representatives recently passed the Regulations from the Executive In Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act, reasserting “Congress’s legislative authority and [preventing] excessive overreach by the executive branch in the federal rulemaking process,” according to a press release from Rep. Kat Cammack (R-FL).
  • A major rule proposed by a federal agency would be required to meet the approval of both the House and the Senate before taking effect.
  • “The REINS Act is the single largest regulatory reform in decades and will save the American people trillions each year in compliance costs,” Cammack said.
MORE STORIES