D.C. Circuit Air Rulings Show Ongoing, Unpredictable Deference To EPA

摘要

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit's recent rulings on two major EPA air policies cements the court's dedication to a longstanding doctrine giving judicial deference to agencies' "reasonable" statutory interpretation, but how the judges will use the doctrine in the future is unpredictable, observers say. The doctrine of Chevron deference is based in the 1984 high court decision Chevron v. Natural Resource Defense Council, which says that when a law is ambiguous or silent on the question at issue in a challenge to an agency action, judges should defer to the agency's interpretation as long as it represents a reasonable reading of the text. But observers have suggested some Supreme Court justices have been looking for ways to narrow the doctrine. However, the two D.C. Circuit rulings issued July 29 appear to underscore ongoing reliance on Chevron, with judges appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents citing it in the decisions.