The Beginning of the End
It will take years of litigation to figure out what Loper means.
The end of Chevron deference isn’t the end of regulation
Congress now needs to do a better job. There can be no more vague language, relying on Chevron to permit the civil service to interpret ambiguity however they see fit. This is precisely the problem for many progressives.
‘Agencies will still be able to regulate. Nothing in the court’s ruling declares that agencies may no longer interpret the law or that they cannot go beyond the explicit words of a statute. Agencies can and should continue to use their expertise and judgment to faithfully execute the law.
‘Nor do the Loper Bright and Relentless cases mean that Congress cannot continue to delegate authority to agencies to regulate. For example, if majorities in both chambers and the president approve a law stating that the Environmental Protection Agency may enact regulation to reduce carbon emissions to the level they were in 1900, that would be permissible.
‘The upshot of the loss of Chevron deference is that Congress is going to feel pressure to up its policymaking game. It is going to be much harder for Congress to do what it has so often done: pass a vague law, let agencies enact policy and then hoot at bureaucrats for going beyond the law.’
GOP plans major crackdown on 'nameless, faceless bureaucrats' after blockbuster Supreme Court ruling
Legislation in Congress would roll back any deference to the agencies, not just Loper’s reversal of deference where there is ambiguity.
‘On Thursday, Schmitt and a group of 11 GOP lawmakers announced new legislation he says will "retake legislative authority away from administrative agencies" and give it back to Congress. Schmitt is also spearheading a working group of 18 of his colleagues to further assess ways Congress can peel back administrative authority.
‘That bill, the Separation of Powers Restoration Act (SOPRA), places what’s called a de novo standard of review within the Administrative Procedure Act, that would prohibit the judiciary from continuing any unconstitutional agency deference standards, which Schmitt says stacks the deck in court against private parties and in favor of big government.
‘Under the new bill, courts will weigh the merits of the argument without a deference standard to either side, which Schmitt says would place U.S. citizens and businesses — either caught on the wrong side of a regulatory enforcement action or challenging the validity of agency action — on an equal footing in court with an administrative agency.’
Uncertainty Over Australian Streamer Regulation “Causing Great Angst,” Claims Producers Body
Foreign governments continue to attack the large US tech and media companies. Here, the Australians want to compel Australian content rules on streaming companies such as Netflix, forcing the streaming companies to subsidize Australian content producers for the right to stream in Australia. Will any one of these tech behemoths have the gumption to say no?
‘Streaming regulation, which will dictate how much of their local revenues streamers have to spend on local Australian content, was due to come in on July 1 as part of the national cultural policy Revive, but the deadline came and went with no announcement on the terms. “Over the past week, I’ve been contacted by members around Australia who are concerned about where our industry now stands,” said Deaner, whose guild represents more than 500 local producers.’
Chevron overruled: 5 federal tax regulation considerations
We’re not going to know for years how Loper plays out in the courts.
‘The first cases challenging agency regulations after Loper likely will be long, drawn-out affairs involving teams of lawyers and a significant number of documents, data, and experts. Lawyers, academics, industries, and the public at large will watch these cases closely, and the media likely will extensively cover the facts and circumstances of each lawsuit, including the names of the parties and business and personal details. One or more federal tax regulations could be among these first cases, and all eyes will be on these proceedings.’
Replacing Biden might alter big tech regulation
The assumption is that a President Harris would be cozied up to the tech companies. She is from California, after all. She might turn once she is in office, though.
‘While Harris has largely been considered friendly to the tech industry, West said that if she were to be selected as a replacement for Biden and win the presidency, she would have to decide whether to continue friendliness or strengthen regulatory oversight.’
ADVANCE Act Strikes Right Balance for Nuclear Energy Regulation
The US wants to make it easier for nuclear power providers to cross the regulatory Rubicon and develop new plants.
‘On July 9, President Biden signed the Accelerating Deployment of Versatile, Advanced Nuclear for Clean Energy (ADVANCE) Act of 2024 into law. Earning a vote of 88 – 2 in the Senate and 393 – 14 in the House of Representatives, the Act manifests strong bipartisan support for the growth of nuclear energy. The ADVANCE Act merits praise — it provides reasonable and targeted measures to reduce regulatory cost on the nuclear industry without resorting to deregulation. It strikes a workable balance between maintaining trust in an independent regulator and addressing a clean energy shortage. On the one hand, it maintains the independence of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), a five-commissioner independent agency created by Congress in 1974 that oversees the licensing and operation of the largest source of clean energy in the United States and safest form of energy in the world. On the other hand, it halves hourly application review fees for advanced reactor applicants, incentivizes developers to begin the licensing process immediately, and expands the capabilities of the Commission. Nuclear energy advocates should recognize the legislation as an invitation for engagement with the NRC and an opportunity for the resurgent nuclear industry to prove itself.’