- Posts by Paul DeCamp
Member of the Firm"Virtually all reputable companies want to pay their people correctly for the work they perform. What often gets in the way is a tangle of fundamentally ambiguous federal, state, and even local requirements that give rise to serious ...
The Supreme Court’s June 28 decision to overrule the 40-year-old case of Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council should not be cause for alarm. It is, however, likely to have implications for employers that are subject to the myriad of workplace laws administered by the United States Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board and other executive branch bodies.
Why the Buzz About Chevron?
For decades, courts have relied on the so-called Chevron doctrine—a mandate by which judges were required to defer to agency expertise when handling controversies surrounding Executive Branch policy, but that rule ended with Loper Bright Enterprises et al., v. Raimondo. While the categorical rejection of Chevron—as inconsistent with the responsibility of courts defined in the APA—went farther than most analysts expected, it should be noted, as Justice Neil Gorsuch’s concurrence makes clear, that the Supreme Court hasn’t decided a case on the basis of Chevron since 2016.
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- NLRB Could Soon Have a Three-Person Republican Majority - Employment Law This Week Video
- Is Cemex Still Valid? Sixth Circuit Creates Uncertainty - Employment Law This Week Video
- What Restoring a Quorum at the NLRB Could Mean for Employers - Employment Law This Week Video
- President Trump Announces Nominees for Two Vacant Seats on the National Labor Relations Board
- NLRB Member Wilcox Reinstated Again: Board Regains a Quorum, at Least for Now