The U.S. Supreme Court wrapped-up its 2023-24 term on July 1, leaving in its wake a spate of decisions that have heads still spinning.
The most publicized decision was its affirmation in Trump v. United States that presidents have immunity from criminal prosecution for “official acts.” The court deferred to a designated definer (the lower court trial judge in the Trump case) to determine exactly what that term encompasses. That determination in turn will dictate whether special counsel Jack Smith still has sufficient evidence to prosecute former President Donald Trump in the pending Jan. 6 obstruction case.
Less prominent among the court’s decisions, though still significant, are several opinions affecting various government regulatory agencies and their rulemaking decisions. One case drawing much attention is Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, in which the court threw out a 40-year old precedent known as the Chevron doctrine.
That doctrine is based on the 1984 Supreme Court decision in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, in which the justices held that sometimes, courts are required to defer to “permissible” agency interpretations of statutes those agencies administer — even when the reviewing court might read the statute differently.
The Loper........