The Demise of the Chevron Deference Doctrine and the Impact on the Consumer Finance Industry

On June 28, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and a companion case, overruled the Chevron Deference Doctrine established in 1984. Under that doctrine, a court was required to defer to a reasonable interpretation of a statute as reflected in a federal agency regulation when the statute itself was vague or silent even though such court disagreed with such regulation. Under Loper, a court is no longer required to defer to an agency regulation. This opinion has stood on its head the established administrative law framework for determining the validity of federal agency regulations.

Most recently on July 1 the U.S. Supreme Court, in Corner Post v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, held that the statute of limitations on claims under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) does not begin until a company is injured by final agency action, allowing entities created long after a rule becomes final to challenge that rule in court on the grounds that the agency failed to comply with the APA. For this webinar roundtable, we have assembled our knowledgeable Ballard Spahr team and leading authorities on the Chevron Deference Doctrine who will discuss or describe:

• The history of Supreme Court cases regarding the circumstances in which courts should defer to federal agency regulations

• Justice Roberts' rationale for overturning Chevron

• The revitalization of Skidmore Deference (depends on how persuasive agency’s interpretation is after examining the thoroughness of the agency’s investigation of the issues, the validity of its reasoning, the consistency of its interpretation over time, and “other persuasive powers” of the agency)

• What deference should be given to agency policymaking and fact-finding as distinguished from legal interpretation and how do you evaluate regulations that constitute mixed findings of fact, policy making and interpretations of law?

• Has the Court merely substituted the Loper Bright Delegation Doctrine for the Chevron Deference Doctrine in which courts will still defer to agencies who interpret certain statutory delegations of authority to agencies? Does the major questions doctrine continue to apply?

• What impact will Loper-Bright and Corner-Post have on regulations (existing or future) of the CFPB, FTC, and the federal prudential banking agencies?

• What about the continued validity of final judgements of the Supreme Court and other lower courts validating regulations based exclusively on the Chevron Doctrine?

• Is Loper a good or bad result for industry?

• What impact will Loper have on federal agencies and Congress going forward?

This program is approved for 1.5 CLE credit in CA, NV, NY, & PA; and 1.8 NJ.  MN CLE is pending.  Uniform Certificates of Attendance will also be provided for the purpose of seeking credit in other jurisdictions.  

Login details can be found in the calendar hold and will be resent the day before the webinar. For more information, contact questions@ballardspahr.com.

Host and Moderator

Alan S. Kaplinsky
Senior Counsel and Former Chair, Consumer Financial Services
Ballard Spahr LLP

Speakers

Richard J. Andreano, Jr.
Practice Leader, Mortgage Banking
Ballard Spahr LLP

John L. Culhane
Partner, Consumer Financial Services
Ballard Spahr LLP

Kent Barnett
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs & J. Alton Hosch Professor of Law
University of Georgia

Craig Green
Charles Klein Professor of Law and Government
Temple University