Supreme Court hears arguments over US agency powers in fishing dispute
By John Kruzel and Andrew Chung
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -The U.S. Supreme Court was hearing arguments on Wednesday in a dispute involving a government-run program to monitor for overfishing of herring off New England's coast that gives its conservative majority a chance to further limit the regulatory powers of federal agencies.
The justices are weighing appeals by two fishing companies of lower court rulings allowing the National Marine Fisheries Service to require commercial fishermen to help fund the program. The companies — led by New Jersey-based Loper Bright Enterprises and Rhode Island-based Relentless Inc — have argued that Congress did not authorize the agency, part of the U.S. Commerce Department, to establish the program.
Arguments were ongoing.
The companies have asked the court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, to rein in or overturn a precedent established in 1984 that calls for judges to defer to federal agency interpretation of U.S. laws deemed to be ambiguous, a doctrine called "Chevron (NYSE:CVX) deference."
Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, who sounded skeptical of the Chevron precedent, said the doctrine has created confusion in lower courts in the cases before the court on Wednesday — and many others.
«Even in a case involving herring fishermen, and the question of whether they have to pay for government officials to be on board their boats… lower court judges, even here in this rather prosaic case, can't figure out what Chevron means,» Gorsuch told Elizabeth Prelogar, the U.S. solicitor general.
Conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh criticized Chevron as ushering in instability by making it easier for new presidential administrations to define laws differently than prior administrations.
«That is
Read more on investing.com
