Judicial Review of Agency Statutory Construction: Chevron
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1) Does the agency's decision include construction of a statute?
| NO
|
DNA
|
| |
| |
| |
YES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3) Is the statute construed administered by the agency?
| NO
|
4) The agency does not get deference
|
| |
| |
| |
YES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5) Is the statute clear and unambiguous?
| YES
|
6) Congress clearly expressed intent governs and a contrary construction by the agency is void. Sometimes the court looks only at the clear, plain meaning of the statute. Other times the court uses traditional tools of statutory construction to determine Congress's intent. In extraordinary cases the court discerns Congress's intent relying on historical factors not captured in the language or history of the particular statute being construed
|
| |
| |
| |
NO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10) Was the statute construed in a relatively formal proceeding under which agency conclusions have the force of law?
| NO
|
The agencies statutory construction is entitled to Skidmore deference but not Chevron deference. Under Skidmore, and agencies construction is entitled to respect in proportion to its persuasive power
|
| |
| |
| |
YES
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The agencies statutory construction may be entitled to Chevron deference. Under Chevron, unless Congress intent is clear courts should differ to a permissible construction of a statute by the administering agency. A construction is permissible if it is sufficiently rational to preclude a court from substituting its judgment for that of the agency.
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|