Press Release

Supreme Court Places Tombstone on Chevron Deference

June 28, 2024

(Anchorage, AK) – Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision that will significantly impact Alaska’s interests when parties appear in federal court to challenge or defend a federal agency action. The Court took back its traditional role of determining what the law is, instead of deferring to federal agencies.

“Federal agencies have used Chevron deference as a shield, limiting the ability of federal courts to look critically at the agencies’ actions all while moving to improperly expand their discretion and authority,” said Alaska Attorney General Treg Taylor. “By getting rid of Chevron, the Supreme Court has restored the separation of powers. Under our system of government, it is a court’s job to offer a final interpretation of the law, not the job of federal agencies.”

For 40 years, federal courts have applied what is known as Chevron deference when reviewing federal agency actions. This doctrine originated from a 1984 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resource Defense Council, Inc. It requires federal courts to defer to a federal agency if the court believes the agency’s interpretation was reasonable and the statute in question is ambiguous. This is true even if the court disagreed with the agency’s interpretation. In practice, what this means is that the State and its citizens are often left with no lasting interpretation of the law and their interests are dependent on the policy choices of each federal administration. For example, a federal district court in Alaska recently upheld a federal agency’s decision to override the State’s hunting seasons and open a rural subsistence hunt although it agreed with the State that ANILCA did not expressly grant the federal agency this authority.

In overruling Chevron, the Supreme Court makes clear that it is the responsibility of the federal courts—rather than the federal agencies—to interpret the law. Chief Justice Roberts explained in the opinion that Chevron “defies the command of” the Administrative Procedure Act, the law governing federal administrative agencies, “that the reviewing court—not the agency whose action it reviews—is to decide all relevant questions of law and interpret...statutory provisions. It requires a court to ignore, not follow, the reading the court would have reached had it exercised its independent judgment as required by the APA.”

Justice Neil Gorsuch in a concurring opinion described the court’s action as “plac[ing] a tombstone on Chevron no one can miss. In doing so, the Court returns judges to interpretive rules that have guided federal courts since the Nation’s founding.” Alaska, joined with 26 other states, and filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court asking for this very result.

“Ever since statehood, Alaska has had to continually fight just to try and hold on to what was already given—fish and game management, submerged lands, land entitlements, resource development, the list goes on,” said Alaska Governor Mike Dunleavy. “This constant deference given to federal agencies has made the fight that much harder and resulted in Alaska being treated as a volleyball going back and forth depending on who’s in the White House. Our legal rights as a state should not depend on who’s in office—those rights either exist or they don’t. The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision today at least gives us a fair chance to fight back and secure the rights we were promised.”

• Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, Decision - 622KB PDF

# # #

Department Media Contacts: Communications Director Patty Sullivan at patty.sullivan@alaska.gov or (907) 269-6368. Information Officer Sam Curtis at sam.curtis@alaska.gov or (907) 269-6269.