On June 28, 2024, the United States Supreme Court overturned 40 years of a legal precedent known as “the Chevron doctrine”, in an opinion which many civil rights legal communities are concerned is a potential future threat to employment rights, civil rights, environmental protections, and other safeguard regulations. In this split 6/3 decision, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., delivered the opinion of the Court, and three Justices, Justice Elena Kagan, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Ketanji Brown Jackson filed dissenting opinions.
Judicial Deference Had Been Given to Agency Decision-Making under the Chevron Doctrine for 40 Years
The June 28, 2024 case is Loper Bright Enterprises et al., V. Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, et al. In this matter, the Court’s decision was limited to the question of whether Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U. S. 837 (1984), should be overruled or clarified. For 40 years, the courts gave deference to agency decision-making under the 1984 Supreme Court’s Chevron decision. Legal scholars now have concerns that the recent ruling by the Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises could endanger agency policymaking that has been based on data and factual evidence collected by the agencies and their experts, across the federal government, in areas including employee rights and labor laws.
Federal agencies, such as the Department of Labor (DOL) , the Environmental Protections Agency (EPA), HUD, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the Center for Disease Control (CDC) etc., are responsible for monitoring and enforcing regulations and statutes that protect the public and fall under its domain. When there is an ambiguity in the regulation or statute, the overseeing corresponding agency was given deference to interpret the meaning of the statute or regulation. Under the Chevron doctrine, if the meaning of the statute or regulation is at issue which resulted in court litigation, courts have usually been required to defer to the agency’s interpretations of the statutes which they administer. It had been assumed that the agency better understands the intent and mission of the statute and has the most hands-on expertise in that area, not a federal Court, be it Federal District Court, Federal Circuit Court (appeals court), or the US Supreme Court.
Under the Chevron doctrine, due to the agency’s years of expertise in their area, the court gives deference to the agency’s competence, interpretation of the meaning, and appropriate implementation, even when a court reads the statute differently. The agencies not only have years of broad knowledge, but also specific expertise, and experts in their field’s knowledge as to the issues involving protecting civil rights, employment rights, consumer rights, airplane safety, food and drug safety, etc.
By way of example, the Federal Aviation Administration, (FAA) regulates civil aviation and U.S. commercial space transportation, develops and administers programs relating to aviation safety and the National Airspace System, and maintains and operates air traffic control and navigation systems for both civil and military aircrafts.
As another example, the safety of food consumed in the United States is monitored by at least three federal agencies: the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture; the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA); and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
In employment issues, the Wage and Hour Division (WHD) of the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) administers and enforces the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) with respect to private employment, State and local government employment, and Federal employees of the Library of Congress, U.S. Postal Service, Postal Rate Commission, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. The FLSA is enforced by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management for employees of other Executive Branch agencies, and by the U.S. Congress for covered employees of the Legislative Branch. The FLSA establishes minimum wage, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and child labor standards affecting full-time and part-time workers in the private sector and in Federal, State, and local governments.
The Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises reined in the power of federal agencies to regulate many of the safeguards for Americans, by curtailing the Chevron doctrine legal precedent which the government agencies relied on to defend thousands of statutes and regulation, from civil rights to environmental protection.
US Supreme Court Set Aside 40 Years of its Own Established Legal Precedent
For decades, agencies and the constituents they serve, had 40 years of established legal precedent in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council which directed judges to defer to the reasonable interpretations of federal agency officials in cases that involve the proper administration of federal laws that are ambiguous. This changed in Loper Bright Enterprises, through overturning four decades of legal precedent, where the Supreme Court struck down a court’s deference to agency interpretation.
Do Not Sit on Your Rights. If You Quit Your Job, You May Lose Right to Prevail in a Lawsuit.
In many instances of discrimination, if you quit your job, you may lose right to prevail in a lawsuit unless you first take certain legally required measures to preserve your job while you are still employed. If you are thinking of quitting, or think you will be fired, you should contact this office immediately to discuss your options in the safest way for you.
What You Can Do
Let me fight for you. I am an aggressive and compassionate employment law attorney who is experienced in successfully representing employees who were discriminated against by employers and was successful in recovering multiple six figure settlement moneys for them. If you are thinking of resigning, or think you will be terminated, or were terminated, it is important that you consult with an attorney who is experienced in discrimination, retaliation and whistleblower law.
If you think you may have been discriminated against, contact Hope A. Lang, Attorney at Law today for a free consultation.
Hope A. Lang, Attorney at Law represents workers throughout the entire state, including Hackensack, Jersey City, Newark, Irvington, Orange, East Orange, Trenton, Paterson, Montclair, Elizabeth, North Brunswick, Cherry Hill, Vineland, Union, Plainfield, Hamilton Township, Lakewood, Edison, Parsippany-Troy Hills, Franklin, Lakewood, and every NJ County, including Bergen, Hudson, Middlesex, Essex, Monmouth, Somerset, Ocean, Union, Camden, Passaic, Morris, Gloucester, Atlantic, Burlington, Camden Counties.
Hope A. Lang, Attorney at Law has convenient locations in Northern, Central, Western and Southern NJ to meet with clients.