Amicus Brief: Relentless v. Dept. of Commerce

For decades, courts deferred to agencies’ interpretations of the statutes they administer. That practice—the Chevron doctrine—took away the courts’ primary role in interpreting law. Chevron was overturned in 2024 in a case called Loper Bright, and courts are still grappling with what that means. 

This companion case to Loper Bright concerns the same regulations, which require fishermen to pay for the federal agents who inspect their boats businesses. (Recall the Oscar-winning movie “CODA.”) On remand after the Supreme Court ruled, the district court upheld the previous interpretation of the law and didn’t properly apply the new framework from Loper Bright, so now we’re back at the First Circuit. 

The Manhattan Institute has joined the National Federation of Independent Business on a brief arguing that the district court misapplied Loper Bright. First, the court mistakenly gave deference to an interpretation of the statute that happened before Chevron was overruled. Second, the court didn’t properly independently interpret the statute as Loper Bright requires. The rule of law requires courts to appropriately do their jobs when interpreting the law.

Ilya Shapiro is a senior fellow and director of Constitutional Studies at the Manhattan Institute. Follow him on Twitter here.

Trevor Burrus is a legal policy fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

Photo: bpperry / iStock Editorial / Getty Images Plus