SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH – This week, the Supreme Court of the United States heard arguments in Loper v. Raimondo, which is a case of massive significance to the future of the Constitution and the separation of powers. Utah Attorney General Sean D. Reyes previously joined an amicus brief from a coalition of attorneys general in support of Loper Bright Enterprises.
General Reyes issued the following statement:
The long-anticipated oral argument in Loper Bright Enterprises was very encouraging as many justices expressed skepticism for preserving the Chevron doctrine. As I have stated many times, Chevron is one of the greatest threats to individual liberty.
For far too long, it has been wielded by big government proponents and unaccountable federal bureaucrats to destroy the freedoms of hard-working Americans like the fisherman in Loper. It is high time we rein in the nearly unchecked discretion of federal agencies to disregard Congressional mandates in furthering their own political agendas.
Loper Bright Enterprises is a fishing company based out of New England. Due to a National Marine Fisheries Service regulation, it was forced to hire a monitor on its boats. Loper filed suit against this edict but lost in the lower courts. In its decision, the D.C. Circuit deferred to the agency’s interpretation of the governing statute under the so-called Chevron doctrine, which instructs courts to defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes rather than independently determine the proper meaning of the statute. Over the years, the Chevron doctrine has given vast power to government bureaucrats to regulate ever broader swaths of our economy and society. Loper is seeking relief at the U.S. Supreme Court, attempting to persuade the Court to jettison the Chevron doctrine once and for all.
In their brief, the attorneys general argued that the Chevron doctrine “has inflicted real and lasting damage on the States, on our citizens and businesses, on our ‘separation of powers,’ and, ultimately, on ‘our Constitution and the individual liberty it protects.’”
The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to release its opinion on this case in June.
