On March 9, 2015, in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association, the United States Supreme Court ruled unanimously that agencies are not required to use notice-and-comment rulemaking to significantly revise its prior "authoritative" interpretation of a regulation. But several of the Justices wrote separately to criticize sharply the doctrine of "Auer deference," under which courts give utmost deference to agencies' interpretations of regulation.
So what is the future of Auer deference, in the aftermath of Mortgage Bankers? On this teleforum, two administrative law scholars offered their views.
- Prof. Jeffrey Pojanowski, University of Notre Dame Law School
- Prof. Christopher J. Walker, The Ohio State University Moritz College of Law
- Moderator: Adam J. White, Counsel, Boyden Gray & Associates