Get the Ricochet app

Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

Download on the App StoreGet it on Google Play

Become a member.

Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.

Episode 300: How SCOTUS Could Shrink the Administrative State

Subscribe to Who Funds that?Subscribe

In theory, the case is a simple question: Must fishing rig owners pay the government for the mandatory government inspectors who attend those rigs? But in deciding that question, the Supreme Court must consider a more complicated one: How much “deference” do the courts owe to federal regulatory agencies’ interpretations of the law? The prevailing rules, known as Chevron deference after a Supreme Court case involving the oil company, demand wide deference to agencies, but that is now being questioned in a case before the Supreme Court which might reverse or constrain Chevron deference. Joining us to discuss this is Paige Gilliard, an attorney at the Pacific Legal Foundation.

Links:

7 Takeaways From Arguments In The SCOTUS Case That Could Slay The Administrative State

The Separation of Powers: {Explained}

Three Chevron Deference nightmares: What happens when courts defer to federal agencies

Follow us on our Socials:

Twitter: @capitalresearch
Instagram: @capitalresearchcenter
Facebook: www.facebook.com/capitalresearchcenter
YouTube: @capitalresearchcenter