The article discusses two upcoming Supreme Court cases, Loper Bright Enterprises v.
Raimondo and Relentless v.
Department of Commerce, which involve intricate federal administrative law questions.
The author argues that these cases are crucial as they challenge the traditional authority of federal agencies in making highly specialized policy decisions, proposing that judges lacking expertise in fields like wastewater management or telecommunications should have the final say.
The cases are seen as part of a broader conservative agenda, led by the Federalist Society, aiming to shift policymaking authority from the executive branch to the judiciary.
The article highlights the historical context of this shift, mentioning Justice Antonin Scalia's stance in the 1980s and the current push to overrule Chevron v.
National Resources Defense Council (1984).
The author expresses concerns that this shift would lead to poorly governed decisions and the judiciary becoming overwhelmed with policy disputes.
Additionally, the article mentions the Supreme Court's recent adoption of the "major questions doctrine," giving it veto power over federal agency actions deemed too ambitious.
The author concludes by emphasizing the potential negative consequences of overruling Chevron and the challenges it poses to effective governance.