A decades-old US Supreme Court doctrine, known as Chevron, that instructs lower courts to defer to federal agencies' interpretations of ambiguous laws may soon be struck down by the high court. Under the 1984 Chevron decision Congress is presumed to have allocated interpretative authority to the agency to resolve any statutory ambiguity or gap, within reasonable bounds. In a recent brief filed by the Department of Justice, DOJ noted that "Chevron gives appropriate weight to expertise, often of a scientific or technical nature, that federal agencies can bring to bear in interpreting federal statutes." In moving away from Chevron deference the Supreme Court is pivoting to a new doctrine, the Major Questions Doctrine (MQD), which instructs courts not to defer to agency interpretation.
A planning committee of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine will organize a workshop to explore the implications of a move away from Chevron to MQD for agencies responsible for protecting public health and the environment.
A one-day in-person workshop and webcast will be held. A consultant writer will be retained to draft a proceedings in brief.