
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


For decades, Congress has been turning over more and more lawmaking power to the Executive Branch. Frequently this is done by legislation giving the head of some agency or department the power to establish rules which have the force of law. What happens when the legislation doesn't explicitly say that such-and-such department has the power to make a certain rule? To deal with this, courts have come up with something called "Chevron Deference". While the case Loper Bright Enterprises, v Gina Raimondo, Secretary Of Commerce deals with who pays the salaries of federal observers on fishing boards, a more fundamental questioning of the court's deference to government agencies interpretation of law is the cornerstone of the petitioner's arguments.
By Paul Engel: Author, speaker and podcaster4
4343 ratings
For decades, Congress has been turning over more and more lawmaking power to the Executive Branch. Frequently this is done by legislation giving the head of some agency or department the power to establish rules which have the force of law. What happens when the legislation doesn't explicitly say that such-and-such department has the power to make a certain rule? To deal with this, courts have come up with something called "Chevron Deference". While the case Loper Bright Enterprises, v Gina Raimondo, Secretary Of Commerce deals with who pays the salaries of federal observers on fishing boards, a more fundamental questioning of the court's deference to government agencies interpretation of law is the cornerstone of the petitioner's arguments.

23,254 Listeners

26,373 Listeners

12,070 Listeners

154,097 Listeners

62,749 Listeners

41,153 Listeners

10,094 Listeners

2,555 Listeners

2,254 Listeners

66,646 Listeners

44,009 Listeners

40,493 Listeners

6,280 Listeners

689 Listeners

17,017 Listeners