Fishing for Justice: The Legal and Moral Case for <i>Loper Bright</i>

By overturning Chevron in Loper Bright, the Supreme Court came to the right conclusion, legally and morally. A textual reading of the Administrative Procedure Act requires courts to decide cases and controversies de novo, without deferring to any litigant. Just because a government agency is a party does not mean courts suddenly lose their ability to interpret statutes, even ones with challenging language. Many commentators argue the practical outcome of this decision will be limited and courts will simply reframe “deference” into “delegation.” I disagree.

I think the impact of this case will be a sea-change for administrative law. Importantly, it will help the parties that need it the most: small businesses and individuals who, previously, never stood a chance in court against the federal government. Not only is this the right outcome statutorily, and perhaps constitutionally, but it is also the proper moral and biblical outcome. In all the academic discussions of administrative law, commenters frequently miss the little guy.

But to consider how overturning Chevron might change lives, one need look no further than the fishermen here.