Facts of the Case
A group of commercial fishermen who regularly participate in the Atlantic herring fishery sued the National Marine Fisheries Service after the Service promulgated a rule that required industry to fund at-sea monitoring programs at an estimated cost of $710 per day. The fisherman argued that the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act of 1976 did not authorize the Service to create industry-funded monitoring requirements and that the Service failed to follow proper rulemaking procedure.
The district court granted summary judgment for the government based on its reasonable interpretation of its authority and its adoption of the rule through the required notice-and-comment procedure. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed.
Questions
Does the Magnuson-Stevens Act authorize the National Marine Fisheries Service to promulgate a rule that would require industry to pay for at-sea monitoring programs?
Should the Court overrule Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council or at least clarify whether statutory silence on controversial powers creates an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency?
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce - Post-Argument SCOTUScast
John Vecchione
On January 17, 2024 the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo...
Is the NLRB Unconstitutional? The Courts May Finally Decide.
This term, the U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear three major cases involving the...
Deep Dive Episode 285 - Loper Bright and the Next Steps for Chevron Deference at the Supreme Court
Regulatory Transparency Project's Fourth Branch Podcast
This Term, the Supreme Court will hear Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo—a case concerning judicial...
Is the Administrative State Inevitable? Loper, Chevron, and the “Abnegation” of Law
Last month, the Supreme Court granted cert in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. Though the case...
.jpg)
Congress Should Prepare to Lead on Regulation
The Supreme Court recently ended President Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, ruling that federal law...
Is Glacier Northwest the Tip of the Iceberg?
Glacier Northwest created no new doctrine. But it may still signal a new direction for labor law.
Nowadays, labor-law cases are a rare sight at the Supreme Court. The Court usually takes...
Chevron Is Dead, Long Live Chevron
The Supreme Court has agreed to revisit Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984), the...
Congress and the Future of Agency Authority: A Discussion of Three Major Administrative Law Cases and Their Implications for Congress
Capitol Hill Club300 First St SE
Washington, DC 20003
