Chevron deference came from a 1984 Supreme Court case:
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council.

The rule was simple in theory:

When a federal statute was ambiguous, courts would defer to a federal agency’s reasonable interpretation of that statute.

Courts applied a two-step framework:

Step One

Is the statute clear?

• If yes → courts apply the statute as written.
• If no → move to Step Two.

Step Two

Is the agency’s interpretation reasonable?

• If yes → courts defer to the agency.

In short:
If Congress didn’t speak clearly, agencies often got the final word.

Why Chevron Was So Powerful

Chevron shaped federal law across virtually every industry, including:

• Environmental regulation
• Labor and employment
• Immigration
• Healthcare
• Financial services
• Consumer protection

Agencies like the EPA, FCC, CFPB, FTC, Department of Labor, and others relied on Chevron to defend their regulations in court.

It made it easier for agencies to implement broad regulatory policies without Congress rewriting statutes every time circumstances changed.

The Criticism

Over time, Chevron became controversial.

Critics argued:

• It gave unelected agencies too much power.
• It weakened the judiciary’s role in interpreting the law.
• It allowed executive branch agencies to effectively “make law.”
• It expanded the administrative state beyond congressional intent.

Supporters argued:

• Agencies have subject-matter expertise.
• Congress often intentionally writes broad statutes.
• Modern governance requires flexibility.
• Courts are not policy experts.

The debate simmered for decades — until 2024.

What Happened in 2024?

In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024), the Supreme Court overturned Chevron.

The Court held:

Courts must exercise independent judgment when interpreting federal statutes.

In other words:

Judges — not agencies — now decide what ambiguous statutes mean.

The Court stated that Chevron was inconsistent with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), which requires courts to interpret the law.

Chevron is no longer controlling precedent.

What Replaces Chevron?

Courts will now:

• Interpret statutes independently