Total run time:
When and how do Courts defer to an agency's interpretation of its own statute? A 1984 landmark case, Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., established what is known as Chevron doctrine, which says that a court must defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of its own statute. This standard has been used ever since by courts in administrative law cases. Recently, the Chevron doctrine has come into questions not only by academics but by the Supreme Court and other judges. What additional forms of deference do judges use (Auer, Skidmore, etc)? What does the Administrative Procedure Act say about whether courts should defer to agencies? What is the relationship between administrative agencies and Article III judges? Are administrative law judges (ALJs) constitutional?
Professor Kristin Hickman uses the case of King versus Burwell to explain the Major Questions Doctrine. Some administrative agency rulemaking involves matters of such importance that the Supreme Court evaluates the merits of a particular rule rather
Professor Kristin Hickman uses the case of King versus Burwell to explain the Major Questions Doctrine. Some administrative agency rulemaking involves matters of such importance that the Supreme Court evaluates the merits of a particular rule rather than automatically deferring to the authority of the agency. The difficulty is - how does the Court decide what issues are important enough to warrant using the Major Questions exception?
Professor Kristin E. Hickman is a Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law at the University of Minnesota Law School.
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
Subscribe to the series’ playlist:
Total run time: