Saying Goodbye to Chevron and Auer? New Developments in the Agency Deference Doctrine

The agency deference doctrine is a rule in administrative law that says courts have to respect how agencies understand laws and rules. But some courts and lawmakers have been saying this rule isn’t good anymore and have been not following it in some cases. Some people are even trying to make a law that would stop courts from following this rule. This article looks at these changes and what it could mean for Florida. Chevron and Auer are two important cases that set the rules for when courts should defer to an agency’s interpretation of a law. In Chevron, the Supreme Court said that if Congress has clearly spoken on an issue, the court and the agency must follow Congress’s intent. But if the law is unclear, the court should defer to the agency’s interpretation as long as it’s reasonable. Auer reinforced this idea, saying that the agency’s interpretation of its own rules should usually be followed unless it’s clearly wrong. The agency deference doctrine allows courts to rely on an agency’s interpretation of a law when making decisions. However, some Supreme Court justices and members of Congress have criticized this doctrine, arguing that it gives too much power to agencies and should be limited. They have proposed legislation to change the standards for judicial review of agency interpretations. One bill passed in the House of Representatives but did not become law. Another bill introduced in the Senate also did not become law. A bill called SOPRA was introduced in the House of Representatives, but nothing has happened with it yet. However, another bill called the “Regulatory Accountability Act of 2017” passed the House of Representatives. This bill includes some parts of SOPRA and makes changes to how courts can review agency actions. The Senate received the bill and referred it to a committee for review. The Florida Administrative Procedure Act gives deference to government agencies when they interpret laws and rules. Some courts in Florida have criticized this deference, saying it could give too much power to agencies and not enough to the courts. They argue that it could violate the separation of powers and due process. This issue is also being debated at the federal level, and it’s possible that changes may happen in the future. But for now, the deference to agencies in Florida remains in place. Courts sometimes have to decide if they should defer to a government agency’s interpretation of a law or rule. This means they have to decide if they should trust the agency’s opinion. There are different rules for when courts should or shouldn’t defer. This can be complicated and there are different opinions about it. In a case called Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Bible, the court had to decide if they should follow the interpretation of a law made by the secretary of education. Some Supreme Court Justices thought it might be time to change the rules about when courts should defer to the government’s interpretation of laws. There are also some proposed laws in Congress that could change the rules about this. The court can send a case back to the agency or overturn the agency’s decision if the agency didn’t follow the law or its own rules. Administrative law judges in Florida don’t have to follow the agency’s interpretation of the law, and they play a different role than the court. Legal decisions do not always have to follow the interpretations of government agencies. Judges can make their own decisions if the law is clear or if the agency is wrong. This information is from the Administrative Law Section and the author is Jowanna Nicole Oates. The Florida Bar wants its members to understand the importance of doing their job well and helping the public. They also want to make sure that the legal system is fair and just, and they want to keep learning about the law.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/saying-goodbye-to-chevron-and-auer-new-developments-in-the-agency-deference-doctrine/