The U.S. Supreme Court has made all of us a little freer by limiting the power of the executive branch — curbing administrative overreach by the vast number of government agencies that impact the lives of millions of Americans.
In a landmark decision in Loper Bright vs. Raimondo, the court overruled its 1984 decision in Chevron vs. Natural Resources Defense Council. The decision had established a doctrine known as Chevron deference — that required courts to defer to federal agencies’ interpretations of any ambiguities in federal statutes.
The misguided rationale underpinning Chevron deference was that agencies, staffed with experts in various fields, were better suited than judges to interpret and implement complex regulations. But over time, the power of unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats metastasized — as exemplified in the Loper Bright case, which brought Chevron crashing down.
Fishing is a difficult, low-margin business. Although federal fishing laws said nothing about it, agency bureaucrats decided on their own to charge small fishing companies for regulatory oversight of their vessels. These costs were estimated to be “up to $710 per day, reducing annual returns to the vessel owner by up to 20 percent,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the court’s opinion.
It is worth noting that in recent years, such regulations have been implemented with some regularity. The administrative state, made up of “alphabet” agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has massed significant power. Although these agencies were initially established to develop and enforce regulations in highly specialized areas, they now operate as a de facto fourth branch of government.
In fact, they combine the functions of the three branches delineated in the Constitution. The agencies have had the power to write regulations (like the legislative branch); enforce them (like the executive branch); and interpret them (like the judicial branch). But unlike those in the other, constitutional branches of government, these bureaucrats are not subject to the democratic process. They are unelected and unaccountable.
That is why it is so important that now, after Loper Bright, regulators are no longer protected from meaningful judicial review. Justice Clarence Thomas stated in his concurrence: “Chevron deference compromises … separation of powers in two ways. It curbs the judicial power afforded to courts, and simultaneously expands agencies’ executive power beyond constitutional limits.”
By dismantling Chevron deference, the Supreme Court has underscored the importance of maintaining a clear separation of powers, where laws are made by elected legislators, enforced by the executive, and interpreted by an independent judiciary. This framework ensures that government remains of, by, and for the people, rather than dominated by a sprawling, unaccountable bureaucracy.
Advancing American Freedom General Counsel J. Marc Wheats stated, “The Constitution created three branches of government and balanced the powers among them because the Founders understood that the unification of the powers of government was one of the central threats to liberty.” Yankee Institute was proud to sign on as an interested party on an amicus brief filed before the court by AAF.
The concept of separation of powers is one of the greatest contributions to the American experiment. We have witnessed other nations — including China and Russia — that grant rights to the people in their founding documents, but these words are empty because of the harsh central control administered by bureaucrats.
As bureaucracy metastasizes, it tends to prioritize its own interests and expansion over its original purpose, thus distancing itself from the will and needs of the people it is supposed to serve. Loper Bright marks the beginning of a much-needed reckoning with the administrative state.
Carol Platt Liebau is president of Yankee Institute.
Frank Ricci is a fellow at Yankee Institute. He was the lead plaintiff in the landmark Supreme Court case Ricci v. DeStefano and the author of the book Command Presence.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline, and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
DONATE TO BIZPAC REVIEW
Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!
Comment
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.
BPR INSIDER COMMENTS
Scroll down for non-member comments or join our insider conversations by becoming a member. We'd love to have you!
