Publication Date
11-2015
Journal
Columbia Law Review
Abstract
The Supreme Court's decision in Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. continues to obsess academics and courts alike. Despite all the attention, however; the "Chevron revolution" never quite happens. This decision, though seen as transformatively important, is honored in the breach, in constant danger of being abandoned, and the subject of perpetual confusion and uncertainty. This Essay seeks both to bury and to praise Chevron.
Chevron is not a revolutionary shift of authority from the judiciary to the executive. That Chevron is dead. The Chevron that survives is an appropriate allocation of decisionmaking responsibility among the three branches, relying on the judiciary to enforce congressional decisions, but protecting agency authority and discretion where Congress has left the decision to the executive. Long may it reign.
Volume
115
Issue
7
First Page
1867
Last Page
1910
Publisher
Columbia Law School
Keywords
Employment Practice and the Law, Labor Law, Administrative Law, Business and the Law, Judicial Review, Judiciary Branch
Disciplines
Administrative Law | Labor and Employment Law | Law
Recommended Citation
Michael Herz,
Chevron Is Dead; Long Live Chevron,
115
Colum. L. Rev.
1867
(2015).
https://larc.cardozo.yu.edu/faculty-articles/1073
