chevron

Subscribe to chevron via RSS

As we reported previously, a petition for rehearing en banc was filed by the plaintiff bank trade associations in National Association of Industrial Bankers v. Weiser. In that case, the panel’s 2-1 decision held that a loan is “made” for purposes of the opt-out provision in Section 525 of DIDMCA in both the state where the bank is located and the borrower’s state, meaning that Colorado interest rate limits will apply to loans made to Colorado residents by out-of-state state-chartered depository institutions.… Continue Reading

Our podcast show being released today commemorates the one-year anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Loper Bright Enterprises – the opinion in which the Court overturned the Chevron Deference Doctrine. The Chevron Deference Doctrine stems from the Supreme Court’s 1984 decision in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. The decision basically held that if federal legislation is ambiguous the courts must defer to the regulatory agency’s interpretation if the regulation is reasonable.… Continue Reading

On June 28, in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, et al., the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron deference doctrine, a long-standing tenet of administrative law established in 1984 in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. This doctrine directed courts to defer to a government agency’s interpretation of ambiguous statutory language as long as the interpretation was reasonable.… Continue Reading

On June 28, in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, et al., the Supreme Court overturned the Chevron deference doctrine, a long-standing tenet of administrative law established in 1984 in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. This doctrine directed courts to defer to a government agency’s interpretation of a statute if the statute was ambiguous regarding, or simply did not address, the issue before the court, as long as the interpretation was reasonable.… Continue Reading

On August 6, 2024, we will be holding a 90 minute webinar roundtable featuring 3 administrative law professors who are among the country’s leading experts on the Chevron Deference Doctrine. To register, click here.

We already have published a short blog about the Supreme Court’s opinion issued on Friday, July 28 in Loper Bright Enterprises et al v.… Continue Reading

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday overturned the long-standing Chevron Deference Doctrine, saying that judges—not federal agencies—should interpret federal laws.

In a 6-3 decision in two marine fishery cases, the court drastically shifted the balance of power in the federal government, saying that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) gives judges the power, not agencies, to interpret statutes.… Continue Reading

On January 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases in which the question presented is whether the Court should 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 judicial deference framework”–the two-step analysis that courts typically invoke when reviewing a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute. … Continue Reading

On January 17, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in two cases in which the question presented is whether the Court should 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 judicial deference framework”–the two-step analysis that courts typically invoke when reviewing a federal agency’s interpretation of a statute. … Continue Reading

The American Bankers Association (ABA) along with 50 state bankers associations, the DC Bankers Association and Puerto Rico Bankers Association sent a letter (the “ABA Letter”) to the Federal Reserve “in strong opposition to the Federal Reserve’s misguided proposal to reduce the regulated interchange cap under Regulation II, and to ask that the proposal be withdrawn pending a rigorous study of this proposal’s impacts and the cumulative impacts of the tsunami of newly finalized and pending regulations from the banking agencies.”… Continue Reading

On February 14, 2024, the Minnesota Bankers Association and Lake Central Bank (the “Plaintiffs”) filed their memorandum in opposition to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s (FDIC) motion to dismiss their challenge to the FDIC’s supervisory guidance on NSF fees.

In June 2023, the Plaintiffs filed a complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) against defendants FDIC and Chairman Martin J.… Continue Reading