NCJ Number
129702
Journal
Columbia Law Review Volume: 90 Issue: 8 Dated: (December 1990), 2071-2120
Date Published
1990
Length
50 pages
Annotation
The United States Supreme Court's decision in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. is discussed in terms of its rationale and reach and its role in clarifying the relationship between law and administration.
Abstract
The Chevron decision established that courts should accept reasonable administrative interpretations of law if Congress has not directly addressed the precise question at issue. The analysis argues that because Chevron applies only in cases of congressional delegation of law-making authority, agency interpretations in a number of contexts are not entitled to deference at all. However, if Chevron allows agency interpretations to defeat other well-established interpretive principles, it will have revolutionized the law. However, many interpretive principles serve an important separation of powers function and should not be overcome by the Chevron principle. Finally, Chevron represents a welcome recognition of a large-scale shift in the allocation of authority within American institutions and reflects a sound understanding of the comparative advantages of agencies in administering complex statutes. Footnotes