45 amicus briefs have been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in support of the petitioners in Loper Bright Enterprises, et al. v. Raimondo.  The petitioners are urging the Court to overrule its 1984 decision in Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Nat. Res. Def. Council, Inc.  That decision produced what became known as the “Chevron framework”–the two-step analysis that courts typically invoke when reviewing a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute.  In addition, three amicus briefs were filed in support of neither party.  All of the amicus briefs can be found here.

It is noteworthy that one of the amicus briefs in support of the petitioners was filed by the Governor of the State of Georgia, Brian Kemp.  In his brief, Governor Kemp argues that the Court should overrule or limit Chevron because of Chevron’s implications for the balance of power between the States and the federal government.  According to the Governor, “Chevron’s presumption that Congress may implicitly delegate legislative power to federal agencies—including the power to preempt state policies—undermines the Court’s longstanding requirement that when Congress intrudes into the traditional domain of the States, it must do so explicitly.”

The other amicus briefs in support of the petitioners were filed by:

The amicus briefs in support of neither party were filed by the following:

  • Professor Thomas W. Merrill
  • (Professor) Aditya Bamzai
  • Professors Kent Barnett and Christopher J. Walker

Professor Kent Barnett will soon be our special guest for an episode of our Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast.  We recently discussed Raimondo in an episode of our podcast for which our special guest was Craig Green, a Professor at Temple University School Of Law.  The episode is titled “A look at the current challenges to judicial deference to federal agencies” and is available here. 

At the ABA Section of Business Law Annual Meeting in Chicago scheduled for September 7 to 9, 2023, I will be moderating a program titled, “U.S. Supreme Court to Revisit Chevron Deference:  What the SCOTUS Decision Could Mean for CFPB/FTC/Federal Banking Agency Regulations.”