Law 360 discusses eliminating the Cheveron deference with William Yeatman.
Backers of such moves say there are both principled as well as political reasons for attacking the Chevron standard.
“It would be silly to think there are not politics in play,” said William Yeatman of the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute.
The effort came after President Barack Obama made clear that he intended to use the regulatory agencies to advance climate, financial and other legislative agendas when he was elected to a second term in 2012, while still facing a Republican Congress, Yeatman said.
“Certainly, the very in-your-face rhetoric of President Obama after winning a second term … I think that raised a lot of eyebrows,” he said.
But there are more principled reasons for wanting to eliminate Chevron deference, Yeatman said.
Regulatory agencies have amassed more and more power over the years and have been able to work, in some cases, without effective oversight from Congress, he said.
Giving the courts more reason to be skeptical of those agencies would help keep them in check, Yeatman added.
“There are definitely constitutional concerns,” he said.
However, even if the legislation proposed by Hensarling and other Republicans could get signed into law, removing the deference may not have the effect that supporters hope.
Read the full article at Law 360.