McCarthy urges Supreme Court to limit administrative state in upcoming case.
Republicans in Congress Back Amicus Briefs Urging Supreme Court to Limit Federal Government’s Authority
Republicans in Congress, led by House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (CA), have thrown their support behind amicus briefs calling on the Supreme Court to unravel a significant precedent that grants the federal government extensive power to interpret laws.
In the upcoming high court term, the justices will consider a case known as Loper Bright Enterprises v. Gina Raimondo. This case challenges the 1984 Chevron deference, a landmark ruling that instructs courts to defer to an agency’s interpretation of statutes when the language in them is unclear or ambiguous.
Commitment to America: Holding Washington Accountable
“As part of our Commitment to America, House Republicans pledged to hold Washington accountable. The Chevron framework makes it easier for unelected bureaucrats to weaponize federal regulations against the American people. The Court should rein in the power of unelected bureaucrats and restore the separation of powers,” stated House Speaker McCarthy.
McCarthy has thrown his support behind the House’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group brief filed in the Raimondo case. This case revolves around four New Jersey fishing companies questioning whether the National Marine Fisheries Service can compel fishing vessels to cover the salaries of federal observers, which amounts to approximately 20% of company revenues.
Other Republican lawmakers, including Senator Ted Cruz (TX) and Representative Mike Johnson (LA), have joined a separate brief in support of the fishermen. A total of 34 GOP lawmakers have also lent their support.
The National Federation of Independent Businesses has filed a brief arguing that “regulatory burdens harm the business community, especially small businesses.” While overturning Chevron may not completely eliminate regulatory burdens, it would “force Congress to consider the regulatory impact of its laws more carefully before enacting them.”
The case, set to be argued by veteran attorney Paul Clement, poses the question of whether the Court should overrule Chevron or, at the very least, clarify that statutory silence on powers explicitly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity warranting deference to the agency.
Conservatives have long sought to limit the broad authority of executive branch agencies, particularly in matters concerning environmental regulations and fossil fuels, which directly impact industries nationwide.
Support for overturning Chevron has also been voiced by pro-Second Amendment groups like the Gun Owners of America. They argue that undoing the 1984 precedent could make it more challenging for agencies like the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to implement bans on gun attachments, such as bump stocks.
The House recently passed the Separation of Powers Restoration Act of 2023, a bill that would require courts to decide cases without considering the Chevron deference.
President Joe Biden has vowed to veto the bill, and given the Democrats’ majority in the Senate, it is unlikely to pass.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...