363:
33:
1502:(APA) as "under the APA, it thus remains the responsibility of the court to decide whether the law means what the agency says." Roberts continued that "Congress expects courts to handle technical statutory questions", and the judicial venues allows for additional input from interested parties via amicus briefs. Roberts' opinion stated that prior administrative actions and court decisions decided under
1272:
the agency's application of the statute was based on a "reasonable" interpretation of ambiguous wording. If so, then the Court would defer to the agency's interpretation of the statute. If not, then the agency's interpretation would likely be deemed impermissible. Here, reasonability was determined by the specific factual circumstances present in the case.
1668:, "The Loper Bright ruling, as you know, said that the courts should not defer to agency rulemaking if a statute is ambiguous. And instead the courts get to determine whether or not what the statute means. Is that your understanding as well? So that would not require any regulations to be reversed or overturned, correct?" Regan indicated agreement.
1251: (1984), that courts must defer to the authority of an administrative agency's interpretation of a statute whenever both the intent of Congress was ambiguous and the agency's interpretation is reasonable or permissible. In its opinion, the Court outlined a two-step test on when to grant deference, known as
1583:– which was decided the day prior and limited the ability of agencies to impose penalties through internal tribunals instead of jury trial in court – were seen as cumulation of the current Supreme Court's efforts to weaken the administrative state as part of a conservative agenda against big government.
1271:
In the first step of the test, the Court would ask whether there was an unambiguous expression of
Congressional intent contained within the statute. If so, then the Court must yield to Congressional intent. If not, then the Court would proceed with the second step of the test. It would ask whether
1798:
On June 28, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Loper Bright
Enterprises v. Raimondo, overturning Chevron USA v. National Resources Defense Council and the federal judiciary's forty-year-old practice of deferring to agencies' reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal
1225:
Starting in 2013, the NEC started to implement a workaround to this issue. It began to develop an amendment to the New
England fishery management plans that would give the council the power – though not explicitly given in the MSA – to require the fishing industry to pay the costs of additional
1565:
would create. She also wrote that while the majority may believe that agency decisions may still be respected by courts, "if the majority thinks that the same judges who argue today about where 'ambiguity' resides are not going to argue tomorrow about what 'respect' requires, I fear it will be
1545:
no one can miss. In doing so, the Court returns judges to interpretative rules that have guided federal courts since the Nation’s founding." Gorsuch further wrote that the only change in administrative law going forward is that federal courts should "resolve cases and controversies without any
1221:
and foreign fisheries, the
Magnuson-Stevens Act (MSA) does not explicitly require Atlantic herring fisheries pay the costs of federal monitors. In addition, budgets for the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) had been falling in recent years. As a result, NMFS had been unable to pay for
1437:
should be overruled outright, or at least limited in its scope. On May 1, 2023, the Court granted the petition, limited to the second question presented. Due to her prior involvement in the case, Jackson recused herself from its proceedings. The
Supreme Court later granted the petition to
1645:, argued that "much or most of what was (somewhat misleadingly) called 'Chevron deference'" could "be recreated under a different label," pointing to language in the majority opinion acknowledging that Congress remains permitted to delegate interpretive authority to agencies via statute.
1381:. The Court acknowledged Loper's arguments regarding ambiguity in the statutory language, but noted that even if these arguments successfully argued for ambiguity in the text, NMFS's interpretation of the MSA would have been a reasonable reading of the statute.
1604:
Elie Mystal wrote that the decision was "the biggest judicial power grab since 1803", as it can strip power given by
Congress to the experts in the appropriate field of the executive branch and place it in the hands of the judiciary for agencies such as the
3016:
542:
1590:
issued a statement saying the ruling "shifts power to judges who do not have the expertise of agency staff who live and breathe the science, financial principles, and safety concerns that federal agencies specialize in". Vickie Patton of the
1376:
providing deference in the case of an ambiguously worded statute, the
District Court found that the MSA unambiguously provides for industry-funded monitoring of the herring fishery, and thus concluded its analysis at the first step of
2891:
1429:, Loper Bright presented two questions to the Court. First, it asked the Court to rule on whether granting the NMFS the power to require domestic vessels to pay the salaries of monitors it carries was based on a proper application of
719:
1255:
deference. The Court reasoned that ambiguities in statute may be a delegation of authority from
Congress, thus limiting a federal court's ability to review an agency's interpretation of the law. In the specific case at the heart of
3151:
184:
requires courts to exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority, and courts may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous;
3024:
1407:, concluding that the language of the MSA was not completely unambiguous about whether or not it provides for industry-funded monitoring of the herring fishery. Instead, they concluded their analysis at the second step of
1226:
monitoring. The NEC submitted this amendment to the NMFS, which in
February 2020 published its final rule establishing a standardized process that would require industry-funded monitoring across New England fisheries.
2973:
1622:
2254:
1385:
2085:
3198:
3032:
1236:
1133:
550:
337:
187:
1884:
170:
or at least clarify that statutory silence concerning controversial powers expressly but narrowly granted elsewhere in the statute does not constitute an ambiguity requiring deference to the agency.
1822:
1541:
deference was inconsistent with both the APA as well as the separation of powers established in the
Constitution. Gorsuch also wrote a concurrence, stating "Today, the Court places a tombstone on
1179:
1163:
1972:
2843:
1534:
case, the majority opinion also found that the 1976 Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act did not authorize officials to create industry-funded monitoring requirements.
1365:
593:
2827:
3193:
2345:
2118:
1777:
1330:
1301:
1241:
1110:
903:
739:
87:
1653:, stated this possibility but concluded that the decision would likely be more consequential, generating "a significant increase in ideological divisions in the lower courts."
726:
1279:
had become among the most frequently cited cases in American administrative law. Over 17,000 lower federal court decisions and 70 decisions by the Supreme Court itself cited
2013:
2246:
1323:
that was used in future cases to question the interpretation of administrative law when the financial impact of the law had not been considered by the agency, such as in
3135:
2401:
3111:
2423:
2075:
758:
2875:
2664:
1144:, the decision assigns the determination of congressional ambiguity to the judicial branch, with executive agency expertise still to be considered under the weaker
1091:
2438:
2368:
3188:
2811:
503:
2052:
3119:
1703:
1614:
1312:
1261:
915:
869:
2546:
3143:
1650:
1004:
536:
498:
1411:, stating that the NMFS reasonably interpreted the MSA when it came to what the Court deemed the "silence on the issue of cost of at-sea monitoring". Judge
2965:
1874:
1290:
In years prior to the current case, the Supreme Court, with a majority of conservative justices, had been seen as leading towards weakening or overturning
2471:
3183:
2941:
2867:
2726:
1011:
891:
435:
3056:
2192:
1980:
1400:
was drawn to replace Justice Jackson after her confirmation. Despite hearing oral arguments, Justice Jackson took no part in the decision of the case.
953:
816:
2215:
1930:
1812:
1724:
811:
3178:
3127:
1058:
965:
920:
910:
886:
874:
794:
732:
2156:
2835:
2310:
1530:
deference in general as the court had been struggling to apply it over the last several years, making it unworkable. In the specifics of the
1190:) may require fishing vessels to "carry" federal monitors on board to enforce the agency's regulations, particularly to prevent overfishing.
1182:, which was intended to provide for the management of marine fisheries in United States waters. One of the provisions of the act is that the
823:
752:
586:
2341:
2108:
1785:
1187:
1026:
999:
970:
857:
806:
799:
480:
470:
1368:
alleging that the MSA did not authorize the NMFS to mandate industry-funded monitoring of herring fisheries. The District Court, applying
2657:
1711:
1084:
960:
714:
709:
1137:(1984), which had directed courts to defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of an ambiguity in a law that the agency enforces.
1692:
994:
852:
828:
37:
1162:(NMFS) for fishing companies to pay for the cost of federal monitors that may be assigned to their boats, under authorization of the
1587:
1183:
1159:
932:
840:
440:
2003:
2673:
1610:
1403:
The court affirmed the judgment of the district court. However, the Circuit Court did not rest its analysis at the first step of
1364:; the company estimated the cost of federal monitoring to be about $ 700 per day. In February 2020, Loper filed a lawsuit in the
1118:
881:
391:
379:
354:
1606:
1033:
898:
864:
702:
3008:
2933:
2732:
2650:
1077:
1038:
937:
650:
636:
445:
2277:
2627:
2697:
1265:
977:
455:
384:
2409:
1315:, asserting that the agency did not consider the costs of implementation of their rule. While this case did not overturn
3048:
2907:
2720:
2632:
2448:
2378:
1499:
1166:. The company claimed that the Act did not allow NMFS to pass the monitors' costs to the fishing companies, challenging
1021:
1016:
430:
322:
181:
1813:"Supreme Court to hear major case on limiting the power of federal government, a long-term goal of legal conservatives"
1264:'s interpretation of what defined a source of production of pollution in its authority granted by Congress through the
3064:
2992:
2756:
2400:
Tierney Sneed, Jeanne Sahadi, Tami Luhby, Brian Fung, Ella Nilsen, Jen Christensen and Katie Lobosco (June 30, 2024).
2036:
1114:
948:
784:
404:
1595:
warned that the decision “undermines vital protections for the American people at the behest of powerful polluters”.
2076:"In Loper Bright and Relentless, Supreme Court returns to high-stakes question of viability of the Chevron doctrine"
3000:
2770:
2738:
1592:
1516:
835:
460:
513:
1197:(NEC) is a regional business association that develops fishery management plans for fisheries off the coasts of
362:
2481:
1320:
1063:
982:
944:
847:
789:
745:
620:
475:
450:
396:
2184:
987:
927:
692:
677:
465:
71:
2800:
2702:
2223:
1946:
1631:
1393:
766:
615:
67:
1637:
Administrative-law professors expressed varying opinions about the likely impact of the court's holding.
2859:
2519:
1558:
1423:
On November 10, 2022, Loper Bright petitioned the Supreme Court to hear its case. In its petition for a
1389:
1334:
1305:
1245:
625:
517:
258:
82:
1875:"Can fishermen be required to pay for federal monitors? And by the way – should Chevron be overruled?"
3080:
2899:
2573:"Air Force Dodges PFAS Water Cleanup in Arizona, Citing Supreme Court Chevron Ruling | Common Dreams"
1296:
684:
2342:"What it means for the Supreme Court to throw out Chevron decision, undercutting federal regulators"
2883:
1194:
671:
607:
2318:
1848:
1752:
and joined the dissent written by Kagan that was part of the combined slip opinion for both cases.
2476:
2417:
2373:
1642:
1561:. Kagan was critical of the majority's position with concern for the disruption that eliminating
1465:
1425:
1145:
697:
580:
350:
2496:
99:
1311: (2022), the Supreme Court ruled against parts of an emissions-related rule created by the
2949:
2851:
2637:
2547:"Democratic senators seek to reverse Supreme Court ruling that restricts federal agency power"
2511:
2109:"'How do we know where the line is?' Supreme Court considers 'Chevron' doctrine in major case"
2044:
1938:
1911:
1903:
1325:
600:
575:
250:
109:
2402:"How the Supreme Court's blockbuster 'Chevron' ruling puts countless regulations in jeopardy"
1675:
led the introduction of the Stop Corporate Capture Act bill in July 2024 that aims to codify
128:
2763:
1672:
1665:
1412:
1388:
heard oral arguments in the case on February 8, 2022. The panel included then-Circuit Judge
411:
141:
3072:
3040:
2776:
2712:
2608:
2532:
1707:
1638:
1554:
558:
508:
246:
226:
214:
1973:"The Supreme Court overturns Chevron doctrine, gutting federal environmental protections"
1468:(on behalf of the United States in both cases). Although Jackson recused herself in the
1460:
on January 17, 2024. The cases were argued by Roman Martinez (on behalf of Relentless),
2957:
2793:
2572:
1620:
Some commentators, including the dissenting justices, pointed out that the decision in
1579:
1397:
1337:
1308:
1248:
644:
3172:
2074:
Mcloughlin Jr., James P.; Stukes, Mary Katherine; Werner, Pierce (November 7, 2023).
1646:
1522:
1443:
1218:
1206:
1202:
2247:"Supreme Court Strips Power From Federal Agencies—Overturning Decades-Old Precedent"
1683:, in addition to increasing transparency and efficiency in the rule-making process.
2687:
2642:
1491:
1461:
1210:
1158:
Both cases originated from fishing companies challenging a rule established by the
238:
222:
206:
2287:
2037:"A Fight Over a Fishing Regulation Could Help Tear Down the Administrative State"
1657:
1550:
1361:
1214:
234:
56:
Loper Bright Enterprises, et al. v. Gina Raimondo, Secretary of Commerce, et al.
2311:"Rep. Boebert, EPA administrator clash over legitimacy of agency and its rules"
2276:
Zurcher, Anthony; Tawfik, Nada; Lambert, Lisa; Epstein, Kayla (June 28, 2024).
1849:"Rep. Boebert, EPA administrator clash over legitimacy of agency and its rules"
2692:
2443:
2216:"Justices Limit Power of Federal Agencies, Imperiling an Array of Regulations"
2161:
1931:"Justices Limit Power of Federal Agencies, Imperiling an Array of Regulations"
1915:
1879:
1597:
1357:
1345:
2048:
1942:
1170:
deference that was applied in favor of the NMFS during lower court hearings.
2113:
1341:
132:
1121:, the law governing regulatory agencies. Together with its companion case,
2157:"Supreme Court strikes down Chevron, curtailing power of federal agencies"
2617:
2369:"Weakening Regulatory Agencies Will Be a Key Legacy of the Roberts Court"
2282:
2008:
630:
1778:"U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Chevron Doctrine—What You Need to Know"
2080:
1360:-based family-owned herring fishing company operating in the waters of
1478:
On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court issued its decision striking down
2004:"Supreme Court move could spell doom for power of federal regulators"
1623:
Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
145:
2439:"We Just Witnessed the Biggest Supreme Court Power Grab Since 1803"
1386:
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
1907:
1649:, Vermeule's colleague at Harvard and former administrator of the
1198:
1706:
order that they develop a cleanup plan for drinking water around
2472:"Supreme Court Extends Time Frame for Challenges to Regulations"
1510:, agency interpretation can still be respected under the weaker
2646:
1464:(on behalf of Loper Bright Enterprises), and Solicitor General
1442:
in October 2023, a closely related case originating out of the
1237:
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
1134:
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
338:
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
32:
2405:
1817:
1661:
1506:
deference are not overturned by this decision, and in lieu of
1902:(6th ed.). New York: Wolters Kluwer. p. 200, §3.2.
275:
Roberts, joined by Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett
1656:
In a congressional hearing on July 10, 2024, Representative
1586:
Environmentalist organizations criticized the decision. The
1222:
increased monitor coverage in the Atlantic herring fishery.
361:
312:) took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
1630:
deference because it created a workaround for the six-year
1472:
decision, she did hear arguments in the consolidated case,
2844:
Bi-Metallic Investment Co. v. State Board of Equalization
1553:
wrote a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Justices
1366:
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
1348:
for failing to account for its financial cost to states.
58:
Relentless, Inc. et al. v. Department of Commerce, et al.
1180:
Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
1164:
Magnuson–Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
3199:
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court
2150:
2148:
2146:
2144:
2142:
2140:
2138:
2136:
1155:
deference were to remain in place from this decision.
299:
Kagan, joined by Sotomayor; Jackson (as it applies to
1710:, after the region's groundwater was contaminated by
1626:
could amplify the re-litigation of regulations given
1392:. Later that month, Jackson was nominated to replace
1372:, granted summary judgment in favor of NMFS. Despite
1217:. One such fishery is the herring fishery. Unlike in
1151:. Existing rules and case law already decided under
3103:
2984:
2925:
2918:
2819:
2810:
2785:
2748:
2711:
2680:
1771:
1769:
1287:in 77% of decisions regarding regulatory disputes.
316:
295:
287:
279:
271:
266:
195:
174:
160:
152:
120:
115:
105:
95:
77:
63:
51:
44:
23:
1446:also challenging the fees issued by the NMFS and
330:This case overturned a previous ruling or rulings
1898:Hickman, Kristin E.; Pierce, Richard J. (2019).
1776:Rachel Rodman and Alec Albright (July 8, 2024).
1520:(1944). However, Roberts said, the principle of
1433:. Second, it asked the Court to rule on whether
3194:United States statutory interpretation case law
1971:Bittle, Jake; Teirstein, Zoya (June 28, 2024).
1450:deference, with which Jackson had no conflict.
1344:'s student loan forgiveness project under the
1283:Between 2003 and 2013, circuit courts applied
2658:
2470:Adam Liptak; Abbie VanSickle (July 1, 2024).
2002:Gerstein, Josh; Guillén, Alex (May 1, 2023).
1811:De Vogue, Ariana; Cove, Devan (May 1, 2023).
1679:deference into law and effectively reversing
1615:Occupational Safety and Health Administration
1313:United States Environmental Protection Agency
1262:United States Environmental Protection Agency
1085:
8:
2422:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (
2278:"The Chevron deference, and why it mattered"
1651:Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
1494:wrote the majority opinion, which held that
499:Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
2942:Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe
2922:
2868:Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth
2816:
2665:
2651:
2643:
2185:"Supreme Court overturns Chevron doctrine"
1546:systemic bias in the government's favor."
1440:Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce
1124:Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce
1092:
1078:
346:
125:Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. Raimondo
26:Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce
20:
1660:summarized the court's ruling, saying to
1537:Thomas wrote a concurrence, stating that
1725:American Hospital Association v. Becerra
1702:the Air Force refused to comply with an
3128:Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital
1966:
1964:
1765:
1737:
349:
2528:
2517:
2415:
2088:from the original on November 15, 2023
138:Loper Bright Enterprises, Inc. v. Ross
3189:United States administrative case law
2121:from the original on January 17, 2024
2055:from the original on January 15, 2024
1842:
1840:
1825:from the original on January 10, 2024
1641:, Professor of Constitutional Law at
1340: (2023), which blocked President
18:2024 United States Supreme Court case
7:
3089:Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
2602:Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
2222:. The New York Times. Archived from
2107:Groppe, Maurine (January 17, 2024).
1887:from the original on March 30, 2023.
1714:runoff from nearby Air Force bases.
1698:Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
1188:United States Department of Commerce
1106:Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
24:Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo
2512:"The Consequences of Loper Bright"
2348:from the original on June 28, 2024
2257:from the original on June 28, 2024
2195:from the original on June 28, 2024
1784:. White & Case. Archived from
166:Whether the Court should overrule
38:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
3184:United States Supreme Court cases
2367:Savage, Charlie (June 28, 2024).
2035:Liptak, Adam (January 15, 2024).
2016:from the original on July 3, 2024
1744:While Jackson recused herself in
1588:Southern Environmental Law Center
1486:was 6-2 with Jackson excused and
1184:National Marine Fisheries Service
1160:National Marine Fisheries Service
441:National Environmental Policy Act
2674:United States administrative law
2633:SCOTUS oral arguments transcript
2245:Durkee, Alison (June 28, 2024).
1611:Security and Exchange Commission
1127:, it overruled the principle of
531:Judicial review of agency action
31:
2340:Daly, Matthew (June 28, 2024).
1873:Elwood, John (March 30, 2023).
1607:Environmental Protection Agency
1260:, the challenge arose from the
779:Regulated fields (and agencies)
3179:2024 in United States case law
3009:Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB
2934:Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner
2733:Government in the Sunshine Act
2437:Mystal, Elie (June 28, 2024).
2214:Liptak, Adam (June 28, 2024).
2183:King, Pamela (June 28, 2024).
1929:Liptak, Adam (June 28, 2024).
1847:Kim, Caitlyn (July 11, 2024).
1498:deference conflicted with the
1356:Loper Bright Enterprises is a
576:Committed to agency discretion
446:Government in the Sunshine Act
1:
2309:Caitlyn Kim (July 11, 2024).
1178:In 1976, Congress passed the
385:Notice of proposed rulemaking
3049:Christensen v. Harris County
2908:Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.
2721:Administrative Procedure Act
1500:Administrative Procedure Act
1186:(a subsidiary agency of the
1109:, 603 U.S. ___ (2024), is a
481:Federal Vacancies Reform Act
471:Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
431:Administrative Procedure Act
323:Administrative Procedure Act
182:Administrative Procedure Act
3065:United States v. Mead Corp.
3001:Skidmore v. Swift & Co.
2993:NLRB v. Hearst Publications
2757:Code of Federal Regulations
2628:SCOTUS oral arguments audio
2497:"Chevron By Any Other Name"
2155:Howe, Amy (June 28, 2024).
1900:Administrative Law Treatise
1517:Skidmore v. Swift & Co.
1384:A three-judge panel of the
1234:The Supreme Court ruled in
1115:United States Supreme Court
405:Code of Federal Regulations
3215:
2771:Emergency Federal Register
2739:Regulatory Flexibility Act
2727:Freedom of Information Act
2618:Oyez (oral argument audio)
2317:. CPR News. Archived from
1593:Environmental Defense Fund
461:Regulatory Flexibility Act
436:Freedom of Information Act
1514:deference established in
1275:Since being handed down,
1131:deference established in
785:Antitrust and competition
504:Administrative Conference
335:
328:
321:
307:
200:
179:
165:
156:Remanded to D.C. Circuit.
30:
1321:major questions doctrine
1064:Statutory interpretation
746:Unitary executive theory
537:Arbitrary and capricious
476:Congressional Review Act
451:National Emergencies Act
397:Administrative law judge
140:, 544 F.Supp.3d
2812:Supreme Court decisions
1566:gravely disappointed."
1490:was 6-3. Chief Justice
693:Congressional oversight
493:Regulatory coordination
466:Paperwork Reduction Act
45:Argued January 17, 2024
2892:Vermont Yankee v. NRDC
2876:United States v. FECRC
2801:Foreign Affairs Manual
2703:Nondelegation doctrine
2527:Cite journal requires
1748:, she participated in
1632:statute of limitations
1398:Chief Judge Srinivasan
1396:on the Supreme Court.
1394:Justice Stephen Breyer
366:
2860:Richardson v. Perales
1853:Colorado Public Radio
1559:Ketanji Brown Jackson
1390:Ketanji Brown Jackson
626:Nationwide injunction
518:Executive Order 12866
514:Cost–benefit analysis
456:Inspector General Act
365:
259:Ketanji Brown Jackson
47:Decided June 28, 2024
3081:West Virginia v. EPA
2900:Califano v. Yamasaki
2786:Policies and manuals
2577:www.commondreams.org
2344:. Associated Press.
1691:In 2024, citing the
1456:was heard alongside
1297:West Virginia v. EPA
727:Independent agencies
666:Separation of powers
2884:Mathews v. Eldridge
2713:Federal legislation
2495:Vermeuele, Adrian.
1195:New England Council
733:Humphrey's Executor
720:Senate confirmation
672:Appointments Clause
425:Statutory framework
161:Questions presented
127:, 45 F.4th
3017:MVMA v. State Farm
2974:Corner Post v. FRB
2836:Londoner v. Denver
2828:CMSPR v. Minnesota
2604:is available from:
2477:The New York Times
2374:The New York Times
2220:The New York Times
2041:The New York Times
1935:The New York Times
1526:does not apply to
1466:Elizabeth Prelogar
1426:writ of certiorari
1119:administrative law
1059:Constitutional law
367:
351:Administrative law
211:Associate Justices
3166:
3165:
3162:
3161:
3099:
3098:
2950:Heckler v. Chaney
2852:Goldberg v. Kelly
2412:on July 12, 2024.
1326:Biden v. Nebraska
1319:, it defined the
1102:
1101:
345:
344:
251:Amy Coney Barrett
3206:
2923:
2817:
2764:Federal Register
2667:
2660:
2653:
2644:
2622:
2616:
2613:
2607:
2588:
2587:
2585:
2583:
2569:
2563:
2562:
2560:
2558:
2543:
2537:
2536:
2530:
2525:
2523:
2515:
2510:Sunstein, Cass.
2507:
2501:
2500:
2492:
2486:
2485:
2484:on July 9, 2024.
2480:. Archived from
2467:
2461:
2460:
2458:
2456:
2451:on July 12, 2024
2447:. Archived from
2434:
2428:
2427:
2421:
2413:
2408:. Archived from
2397:
2391:
2390:
2388:
2386:
2377:. Archived from
2364:
2358:
2357:
2355:
2353:
2337:
2331:
2330:
2328:
2326:
2321:on July 15, 2024
2306:
2300:
2299:
2297:
2295:
2290:on July 15, 2024
2286:. Archived from
2273:
2267:
2266:
2264:
2262:
2242:
2236:
2235:
2233:
2231:
2211:
2205:
2204:
2202:
2200:
2189:E&E Politico
2180:
2174:
2173:
2171:
2169:
2152:
2131:
2130:
2128:
2126:
2104:
2098:
2097:
2095:
2093:
2071:
2065:
2064:
2062:
2060:
2032:
2026:
2025:
2023:
2021:
1999:
1993:
1992:
1990:
1988:
1983:on July 12, 2024
1979:. Archived from
1968:
1959:
1958:
1956:
1954:
1949:on July 13, 2024
1945:. Archived from
1926:
1920:
1919:
1895:
1889:
1888:
1870:
1864:
1863:
1861:
1859:
1844:
1835:
1834:
1832:
1830:
1808:
1802:
1801:
1795:
1793:
1788:on July 12, 2024
1773:
1753:
1742:
1673:Elizabeth Warren
1666:Michael S. Regan
1603:
1474:Relentless, Inc.
1458:Relentless, Inc.
1413:Justin R. Walker
1117:in the field of
1113:decision of the
1094:
1087:
1080:
753:Legislative veto
509:Executive orders
412:Federal Register
347:
196:Court membership
35:
34:
21:
3214:
3213:
3209:
3208:
3207:
3205:
3204:
3203:
3169:
3168:
3167:
3158:
3152:NCTA v. Brand X
3095:
3073:Kisor v. Wilkie
3041:Auer v. Robbins
3033:Chevron v. NRDC
2980:
2919:Judicial Review
2914:
2806:
2781:
2777:Regulations.gov
2744:
2707:
2676:
2671:
2620:
2614:
2611:
2605:
2597:
2592:
2591:
2581:
2579:
2571:
2570:
2566:
2556:
2554:
2553:. July 23, 2024
2545:
2544:
2540:
2526:
2516:
2509:
2508:
2504:
2494:
2493:
2489:
2469:
2468:
2464:
2454:
2452:
2436:
2435:
2431:
2414:
2399:
2398:
2394:
2384:
2382:
2381:on July 9, 2024
2366:
2365:
2361:
2351:
2349:
2339:
2338:
2334:
2324:
2322:
2308:
2307:
2303:
2293:
2291:
2275:
2274:
2270:
2260:
2258:
2244:
2243:
2239:
2229:
2227:
2226:on July 9, 2024
2213:
2212:
2208:
2198:
2196:
2182:
2181:
2177:
2167:
2165:
2154:
2153:
2134:
2124:
2122:
2106:
2105:
2101:
2091:
2089:
2073:
2072:
2068:
2058:
2056:
2034:
2033:
2029:
2019:
2017:
2001:
2000:
1996:
1986:
1984:
1970:
1969:
1962:
1952:
1950:
1928:
1927:
1923:
1897:
1896:
1892:
1872:
1871:
1867:
1857:
1855:
1846:
1845:
1838:
1828:
1826:
1810:
1809:
1805:
1791:
1789:
1775:
1774:
1767:
1762:
1757:
1756:
1743:
1739:
1734:
1720:
1708:Tucson, Arizona
1689:
1639:Adrian Vermeule
1601:
1572:
1555:Sonia Sotomayor
1421:
1354:
1232:
1230:Prior precedent
1176:
1098:
1069:
1068:
1054:
1046:
1045:
1034:Social Security
780:
772:
771:
703:Organic statute
667:
659:
658:
621:Major questions
532:
524:
523:
494:
486:
485:
426:
418:
417:
375:
331:
249:
247:Brett Kavanaugh
237:
227:Sonia Sotomayor
225:
215:Clarence Thomas
136:
70:
57:
46:
40:
25:
19:
12:
11:
5:
3212:
3210:
3202:
3201:
3196:
3191:
3186:
3181:
3171:
3170:
3164:
3163:
3160:
3159:
3157:
3156:
3148:
3144:Whitman v. ATA
3140:
3132:
3124:
3116:
3107:
3105:
3101:
3100:
3097:
3096:
3094:
3093:
3085:
3077:
3069:
3061:
3053:
3045:
3037:
3029:
3021:
3013:
3005:
2997:
2988:
2986:
2982:
2981:
2979:
2978:
2970:
2966:Norton v. SUWA
2962:
2958:Webster v. Doe
2954:
2946:
2938:
2929:
2927:
2920:
2916:
2915:
2913:
2912:
2904:
2896:
2888:
2880:
2872:
2864:
2856:
2848:
2840:
2832:
2823:
2821:
2814:
2808:
2807:
2805:
2804:
2797:
2794:Justice Manual
2789:
2787:
2783:
2782:
2780:
2779:
2774:
2767:
2760:
2752:
2750:
2746:
2745:
2743:
2742:
2736:
2730:
2724:
2717:
2715:
2709:
2708:
2706:
2705:
2700:
2695:
2690:
2684:
2682:
2678:
2677:
2672:
2670:
2669:
2662:
2655:
2647:
2641:
2640:
2638:SCOTUS opinion
2635:
2630:
2624:
2623:
2596:
2595:External links
2593:
2590:
2589:
2564:
2538:
2529:|journal=
2502:
2487:
2462:
2429:
2392:
2359:
2332:
2301:
2268:
2237:
2206:
2175:
2132:
2099:
2066:
2027:
1994:
1960:
1921:
1890:
1865:
1836:
1803:
1764:
1763:
1761:
1758:
1755:
1754:
1736:
1735:
1733:
1730:
1729:
1728:
1719:
1716:
1688:
1685:
1664:Administrator
1634:for lawsuits.
1580:SEC v. Jarkesy
1571:
1568:
1420:
1417:
1353:
1350:
1231:
1228:
1175:
1172:
1100:
1099:
1097:
1096:
1089:
1082:
1074:
1071:
1070:
1067:
1066:
1061:
1055:
1053:Related topics
1052:
1051:
1048:
1047:
1044:
1043:
1042:
1041:
1031:
1030:
1029:
1024:
1019:
1012:Transportation
1009:
1008:
1007:
1002:
992:
991:
990:
985:
975:
974:
973:
968:
958:
957:
956:
942:
941:
940:
935:
925:
924:
923:
918:
908:
907:
906:
896:
895:
894:
889:
879:
878:
877:
872:
862:
861:
860:
855:
845:
844:
843:
833:
832:
831:
826:
821:
820:
819:
804:
803:
802:
797:
792:
781:
778:
777:
774:
773:
770:
769:
764:
763:
762:
750:
749:
748:
743:
736:
724:
723:
722:
717:
712:
707:
706:
705:
690:
689:
688:
681:
668:
665:
664:
661:
660:
657:
656:
655:
654:
642:
641:
640:
628:
623:
618:
613:
612:
611:
604:
597:
590:
578:
573:
572:
571:
564:
548:
547:
546:
533:
530:
529:
526:
525:
522:
521:
511:
506:
501:
495:
492:
491:
488:
487:
484:
483:
478:
473:
468:
463:
458:
453:
448:
443:
438:
433:
427:
424:
423:
420:
419:
416:
415:
408:
401:
400:
399:
389:
388:
387:
376:
373:
372:
369:
368:
358:
357:
343:
342:
333:
332:
329:
326:
325:
319:
318:
314:
313:
305:
304:
297:
293:
292:
289:
285:
284:
281:
277:
276:
273:
269:
268:
264:
263:
262:
261:
212:
209:
204:
198:
197:
193:
192:
177:
176:
172:
171:
163:
162:
158:
157:
154:
150:
149:
122:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
103:
102:
97:
93:
92:
79:
75:
74:
65:
61:
60:
53:
52:Full case name
49:
48:
42:
41:
36:
28:
27:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3211:
3200:
3197:
3195:
3192:
3190:
3187:
3185:
3182:
3180:
3177:
3176:
3174:
3154:
3153:
3149:
3146:
3145:
3141:
3138:
3137:
3136:Gade v. NSWMA
3133:
3130:
3129:
3125:
3122:
3121:
3120:CFTC v. Schor
3117:
3114:
3113:
3112:INS v. Chadha
3109:
3108:
3106:
3104:Agency Action
3102:
3091:
3090:
3086:
3083:
3082:
3078:
3075:
3074:
3070:
3067:
3066:
3062:
3059:
3058:
3054:
3051:
3050:
3046:
3043:
3042:
3038:
3035:
3034:
3030:
3027:
3026:
3022:
3019:
3018:
3014:
3011:
3010:
3006:
3003:
3002:
2998:
2995:
2994:
2990:
2989:
2987:
2983:
2976:
2975:
2971:
2968:
2967:
2963:
2960:
2959:
2955:
2952:
2951:
2947:
2944:
2943:
2939:
2936:
2935:
2931:
2930:
2928:
2926:Reviewability
2924:
2921:
2917:
2910:
2909:
2905:
2902:
2901:
2897:
2894:
2893:
2889:
2886:
2885:
2881:
2878:
2877:
2873:
2870:
2869:
2865:
2862:
2861:
2857:
2854:
2853:
2849:
2846:
2845:
2841:
2838:
2837:
2833:
2830:
2829:
2825:
2824:
2822:
2818:
2815:
2813:
2809:
2803:
2802:
2798:
2796:
2795:
2791:
2790:
2788:
2784:
2778:
2775:
2773:
2772:
2768:
2766:
2765:
2761:
2759:
2758:
2754:
2753:
2751:
2747:
2740:
2737:
2734:
2731:
2728:
2725:
2722:
2719:
2718:
2716:
2714:
2710:
2704:
2701:
2699:
2696:
2694:
2691:
2689:
2686:
2685:
2683:
2679:
2675:
2668:
2663:
2661:
2656:
2654:
2649:
2648:
2645:
2639:
2636:
2634:
2631:
2629:
2626:
2625:
2619:
2610:
2603:
2599:
2598:
2594:
2578:
2574:
2568:
2565:
2552:
2548:
2542:
2539:
2534:
2521:
2513:
2506:
2503:
2498:
2491:
2488:
2483:
2479:
2478:
2473:
2466:
2463:
2450:
2446:
2445:
2440:
2433:
2430:
2425:
2419:
2411:
2407:
2403:
2396:
2393:
2380:
2376:
2375:
2370:
2363:
2360:
2347:
2343:
2336:
2333:
2320:
2316:
2312:
2305:
2302:
2289:
2285:
2284:
2279:
2272:
2269:
2256:
2252:
2248:
2241:
2238:
2225:
2221:
2217:
2210:
2207:
2194:
2190:
2186:
2179:
2176:
2164:
2163:
2158:
2151:
2149:
2147:
2145:
2143:
2141:
2139:
2137:
2133:
2120:
2116:
2115:
2110:
2103:
2100:
2087:
2083:
2082:
2077:
2070:
2067:
2054:
2050:
2046:
2042:
2038:
2031:
2028:
2015:
2011:
2010:
2005:
1998:
1995:
1982:
1978:
1974:
1967:
1965:
1961:
1948:
1944:
1940:
1936:
1932:
1925:
1922:
1917:
1913:
1909:
1905:
1901:
1894:
1891:
1886:
1882:
1881:
1876:
1869:
1866:
1854:
1850:
1843:
1841:
1837:
1824:
1820:
1819:
1814:
1807:
1804:
1800:
1787:
1783:
1782:whitecase.com
1779:
1772:
1770:
1766:
1759:
1751:
1747:
1741:
1738:
1731:
1727:
1726:
1722:
1721:
1717:
1715:
1713:
1709:
1705:
1701:
1699:
1695:'s ruling in
1694:
1693:Supreme Court
1686:
1684:
1682:
1678:
1674:
1669:
1667:
1663:
1659:
1654:
1652:
1648:
1647:Cass Sunstein
1644:
1640:
1635:
1633:
1629:
1625:
1624:
1618:
1616:
1612:
1608:
1600:
1599:
1594:
1589:
1584:
1582:
1581:
1576:
1569:
1567:
1564:
1560:
1556:
1552:
1547:
1544:
1540:
1535:
1533:
1529:
1525:
1524:
1523:stare decisis
1519:
1518:
1513:
1509:
1505:
1501:
1497:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1481:
1476:
1475:
1471:
1467:
1463:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1449:
1445:
1444:First Circuit
1441:
1436:
1432:
1428:
1427:
1419:Supreme Court
1418:
1416:
1414:
1410:
1406:
1401:
1399:
1395:
1391:
1387:
1382:
1380:
1375:
1371:
1367:
1363:
1359:
1351:
1349:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1327:
1322:
1318:
1314:
1310:
1307:
1303:
1299:
1298:
1293:
1288:
1286:
1282:
1278:
1273:
1269:
1267:
1266:Clean Air Act
1263:
1259:
1254:
1250:
1247:
1243:
1239:
1238:
1229:
1227:
1223:
1220:
1219:North Pacific
1216:
1212:
1208:
1207:Massachusetts
1204:
1203:New Hampshire
1200:
1196:
1191:
1189:
1185:
1181:
1173:
1171:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1156:
1154:
1150:
1148:
1143:
1138:
1136:
1135:
1130:
1126:
1125:
1120:
1116:
1112:
1108:
1107:
1095:
1090:
1088:
1083:
1081:
1076:
1075:
1073:
1072:
1065:
1062:
1060:
1057:
1056:
1050:
1049:
1040:
1037:
1036:
1035:
1032:
1028:
1025:
1023:
1020:
1018:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1010:
1006:
1003:
1001:
998:
997:
996:
993:
989:
986:
984:
981:
980:
979:
976:
972:
969:
967:
964:
963:
962:
959:
955:
952:
951:
950:
946:
943:
939:
936:
934:
931:
930:
929:
926:
922:
919:
917:
914:
913:
912:
909:
905:
902:
901:
900:
897:
893:
890:
888:
885:
884:
883:
880:
876:
873:
871:
868:
867:
866:
863:
859:
856:
854:
851:
850:
849:
846:
842:
839:
838:
837:
836:Communication
834:
830:
827:
825:
822:
818:
815:
814:
813:
810:
809:
808:
805:
801:
798:
796:
793:
791:
788:
787:
786:
783:
782:
776:
775:
768:
767:Nondelegation
765:
761:
760:
756:
755:
754:
751:
747:
744:
742:
741:
737:
735:
734:
730:
729:
728:
725:
721:
718:
716:
713:
711:
710:Appropriation
708:
704:
701:
700:
699:
698:Authorization
696:
695:
694:
691:
687:
686:
682:
680:
679:
675:
674:
673:
670:
669:
663:
662:
653:
652:
648:
647:
646:
643:
639:
638:
634:
633:
632:
629:
627:
624:
622:
619:
617:
614:
610:
609:
605:
603:
602:
598:
596:
595:
591:
589:
588:
584:
583:
582:
579:
577:
574:
570:
569:
565:
563:
561:
557:
556:
555:
553:
549:
545:
544:
540:
539:
538:
535:
534:
528:
527:
519:
515:
512:
510:
507:
505:
502:
500:
497:
496:
490:
489:
482:
479:
477:
474:
472:
469:
467:
464:
462:
459:
457:
454:
452:
449:
447:
444:
442:
439:
437:
434:
432:
429:
428:
422:
421:
414:
413:
409:
407:
406:
402:
398:
395:
394:
393:
390:
386:
383:
382:
381:
378:
377:
371:
370:
364:
360:
359:
356:
355:United States
352:
348:
340:
339:
334:
327:
324:
320:
315:
311:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
274:
270:
267:Case opinions
265:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
236:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
213:
210:
208:
205:
203:Chief Justice
202:
201:
199:
194:
191:is overruled.
190:
189:
183:
178:
173:
169:
164:
159:
155:
151:
147:
143:
139:
134:
130:
126:
123:
119:
114:
111:
108:
104:
101:
100:Oral argument
98:
94:
90:
89:
84:
80:
76:
73:
69:
66:
62:
59:
54:
50:
43:
39:
29:
22:
16:
3150:
3142:
3134:
3126:
3118:
3110:
3088:
3087:
3079:
3071:
3063:
3055:
3047:
3039:
3031:
3025:BGLC v. NRDC
3023:
3015:
3007:
2999:
2991:
2972:
2964:
2956:
2948:
2940:
2932:
2906:
2898:
2890:
2882:
2874:
2866:
2858:
2850:
2842:
2834:
2826:
2799:
2792:
2769:
2762:
2755:
2688:Adjudication
2601:
2580:. Retrieved
2576:
2567:
2555:. Retrieved
2550:
2541:
2520:cite journal
2505:
2490:
2482:the original
2475:
2465:
2453:. Retrieved
2449:the original
2442:
2432:
2410:the original
2395:
2383:. Retrieved
2379:the original
2372:
2362:
2350:. Retrieved
2335:
2323:. Retrieved
2319:the original
2314:
2304:
2292:. Retrieved
2288:the original
2281:
2271:
2259:. Retrieved
2250:
2240:
2228:. Retrieved
2224:the original
2219:
2209:
2197:. Retrieved
2188:
2178:
2166:. Retrieved
2160:
2123:. Retrieved
2112:
2102:
2090:. Retrieved
2079:
2069:
2057:. Retrieved
2040:
2030:
2018:. Retrieved
2007:
1997:
1985:. Retrieved
1981:the original
1976:
1951:. Retrieved
1947:the original
1934:
1924:
1899:
1893:
1878:
1868:
1856:. Retrieved
1852:
1827:. Retrieved
1816:
1806:
1797:
1790:. Retrieved
1786:the original
1781:
1749:
1746:Loper Bright
1745:
1740:
1723:
1697:
1696:
1690:
1681:Loper Bright
1680:
1676:
1670:
1655:
1636:
1627:
1621:
1619:
1596:
1585:
1578:
1575:Loper Bright
1574:
1573:
1562:
1548:
1542:
1538:
1536:
1532:Loper Bright
1531:
1527:
1521:
1515:
1511:
1507:
1503:
1495:
1492:John Roberts
1487:
1483:
1479:
1477:
1473:
1470:Loper Bright
1469:
1462:Paul Clement
1457:
1454:Loper Bright
1453:
1452:
1447:
1439:
1434:
1430:
1424:
1422:
1408:
1404:
1402:
1383:
1378:
1373:
1369:
1355:
1352:Lower courts
1324:
1316:
1295:
1291:
1289:
1284:
1280:
1276:
1274:
1270:
1257:
1252:
1235:
1233:
1224:
1211:Rhode Island
1192:
1177:
1167:
1157:
1152:
1146:
1141:
1139:
1132:
1128:
1123:
1122:
1105:
1104:
1103:
757:
738:
731:
685:Noel Canning
683:
676:
649:
635:
606:
599:
592:
585:
568:Loper Bright
567:
566:
559:
551:
541:
410:
403:
392:Adjudication
336:
317:Laws applied
310:Loper Bright
309:
308:Jackson (in
300:
254:
242:
239:Neil Gorsuch
230:
223:Samuel Alito
218:
207:John Roberts
186:
167:
137:
124:
116:Case history
86:
55:
15:
3057:FDA v. BWTC
2820:Due Process
2749:Regulations
2125:January 17,
2092:January 18,
2059:January 15,
1658:Dan Goldman
1551:Elena Kagan
1482:deference.
1415:dissented.
1362:New England
1215:Connecticut
1140:In lieu of
911:Immigration
899:Health care
865:Environment
637:Abbott Labs
594:Bi-Metallic
581:Due process
288:Concurrence
280:Concurrence
235:Elena Kagan
148: 2021).
135: 2022).
64:Docket nos.
3173:Categories
2693:Rulemaking
2582:August 18,
2557:August 16,
2444:The Nation
2162:SCOTUSBlog
1916:1053125104
1908:2018043030
1880:Scotusblog
1858:August 16,
1760:References
1750:Relentless
1613:, and the
1598:The Nation
1488:Relentless
1358:New Jersey
1346:HEROES Act
1174:Background
961:Securities
616:Exhaustion
543:State Farm
380:Rulemaking
301:Relentless
153:Subsequent
2418:cite news
2114:USA Today
2049:0362-4331
1943:0362-4331
1570:Reactions
1342:Joe Biden
1149:deference
949:trademark
740:Seila Law
562:deference
554:deference
133:D.C. Cir.
78:Citations
2985:Standard
2681:Concepts
2600:Text of
2551:NBC News
2455:June 30,
2385:June 30,
2352:June 28,
2346:Archived
2325:July 15,
2315:CPR News
2294:June 29,
2283:BBC News
2261:June 28,
2255:Archived
2230:July 12,
2199:June 28,
2193:Archived
2168:June 29,
2119:Archived
2086:Archived
2053:Archived
2020:June 30,
2014:Archived
2009:Politico
1987:June 29,
1953:June 29,
1885:Archived
1823:Archived
1792:July 12,
1718:See also
1671:Senator
1549:Justice
1512:Skidmore
1281:Chevron.
1147:Skidmore
1111:landmark
978:Taxation
812:Treasury
715:Hearings
645:Standing
631:Ripeness
601:Goldberg
587:Londoner
272:Majority
106:Decision
96:Argument
2081:Reuters
1829:May 13,
1677:Chevron
1643:Harvard
1628:Chevron
1563:Chevron
1543:Chevron
1539:Chevron
1528:Chevron
1508:Chevron
1504:Chevron
1496:Chevron
1480:Chevron
1448:Chevron
1435:Chevron
1431:Chevron
1409:Chevron
1405:Chevron
1379:Chevron
1374:Chevron
1370:Chevron
1317:Chevron
1292:Chevron
1285:Chevron
1277:Chevron
1258:Chevron
1253:Chevron
1168:Chevron
1153:Chevron
1142:Chevron
1129:Chevron
807:Banking
678:Freytag
608:Mathews
552:Chevron
374:General
353:of the
296:Dissent
291:Gorsuch
188:Chevron
175:Holding
168:Chevron
110:Opinion
72:22-1219
3155:(2005)
3147:(2001)
3139:(1992)
3131:(1988)
3123:(1986)
3115:(1983)
3092:(2024)
3084:(2022)
3076:(2019)
3068:(2001)
3060:(2000)
3052:(2000)
3044:(1997)
3036:(1984)
3028:(1983)
3020:(1983)
3012:(1951)
3004:(1944)
2996:(1944)
2977:(2024)
2969:(2004)
2961:(1988)
2953:(1985)
2945:(1971)
2937:(1967)
2911:(1982)
2903:(1979)
2895:(1978)
2887:(1976)
2879:(1973)
2871:(1972)
2863:(1971)
2855:(1970)
2847:(1915)
2839:(1908)
2831:(1890)
2741:(1980)
2735:(1976)
2729:(1966)
2723:(1946)
2698:Notice
2621:
2615:
2612:
2609:Justia
2606:
2251:Forbes
2047:
1941:
1914:
1906:
1687:Impact
1609:, the
1602:'s
1213:, and
945:Patent
848:Energy
759:Chadha
341:(1984)
283:Thomas
257:
255:·
253:
245:
243:·
241:
233:
231:·
229:
221:
219:·
217:
146:D.D.C.
144: (
131: (
68:22-451
1977:Grist
1799:laws.
1732:Notes
1484:Loper
1333:
1304:
1294:. In
1244:
1199:Maine
995:Trade
928:Labor
651:Lujan
121:Prior
85:___ (
2584:2024
2559:2024
2533:help
2457:2024
2424:link
2387:2024
2354:2024
2327:2024
2296:2024
2263:2024
2232:2024
2201:2024
2170:2024
2127:2024
2094:2024
2061:2024
2045:ISSN
2022:2024
1989:2024
1955:2024
1939:ISSN
1912:OCLC
1904:LCCN
1860:2024
1831:2023
1794:2024
1712:PFAS
1577:and
1557:and
1335:U.S.
1306:U.S.
1246:U.S.
1193:The
1027:NTSB
971:CFTC
938:NLRB
921:EOIR
882:Food
858:FERC
824:FDIC
800:CFPB
795:CPSC
560:Auer
180:The
88:more
83:U.S.
81:603
2406:CNN
1818:CNN
1704:EPA
1662:EPA
1338:477
1331:600
1309:697
1302:597
1249:837
1242:467
1039:SSA
1022:STB
1017:DOT
1005:ITC
1000:DOC
983:IRS
966:SEC
954:PTO
933:DOL
916:DHS
904:HHS
892:CDC
887:FDA
875:FWS
870:EPA
853:DOE
841:FCC
829:FRB
817:OCC
790:FTC
129:359
3175::
2575:.
2549:.
2524::
2522:}}
2518:{{
2474:.
2441:.
2420:}}
2416:{{
2404:.
2371:.
2313:.
2280:.
2253:.
2249:.
2218:.
2191:.
2187:.
2159:.
2135:^
2117:.
2111:.
2084:.
2078:.
2051:.
2043:.
2039:.
2012:.
2006:.
1975:.
1963:^
1937:.
1933:.
1910:.
1883:.
1877:.
1851:.
1839:^
1821:.
1815:.
1796:.
1780:.
1768:^
1617:.
1329:,
1300:,
1268:.
1240:,
1209:,
1205:,
1201:,
988:TC
142:82
2666:e
2659:t
2652:v
2586:.
2561:.
2535:)
2531:(
2514:.
2499:.
2459:.
2426:)
2389:.
2356:.
2329:.
2298:.
2265:.
2234:.
2203:.
2172:.
2129:.
2096:.
2063:.
2024:.
1991:.
1957:.
1918:.
1862:.
1833:.
1700:,
1093:e
1086:t
1079:v
947:/
520:)
516:(
303:)
91:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
