
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.

23,356 Listeners

26,464 Listeners

12,091 Listeners

153,989 Listeners

64,567 Listeners

41,393 Listeners

10,200 Listeners

2,550 Listeners

2,275 Listeners

65,964 Listeners

43,953 Listeners

40,434 Listeners

6,298 Listeners

696 Listeners

16,982 Listeners