Loper Bright’s impact on employment laws: Navigating the post-Chevron landscape

The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark case Loper Bright Enter., et al. v. Raimondo, et al. (issued on June 28, 2024) signals a seismic shift in employment law, dismantling federal agencies’ long-standing authority under Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. (1984) to interpret ambiguous statutes. The decision has the potential to unravel existing regulations and spark a wave of litigation that could reshape the regulatory landscape for years to come.

40 years of deference

Forty years ago, when issuing its landmark opinion in Chevron, the Supreme Court established the principle known as “Chevron deference,” a doctrine that compels federal courts to defer to a federal agency’s interpretation of ambiguous statutory language within its own regulatory scope. Under this doctrine, if a law is unclear, courts must uphold an agency’s interpretation as long as it’s “reasonable,” which is a very low burden for agencies to meet.

Chevron deference has significantly affected federal agencies’ rulemaking, granting them broad authority to interpret and implement laws, thereby influencing a wide array of regulatory areas, including labor, environmental protection, and public health. The doctrine’s centrality in administrative law has made it a cornerstone for defending agency actions against legal challenges.