← Back to context

Comment by ilovetux

2 hours ago

Didn't the supreme court recently overturn the Chevron Doctrine?

Doesn't that mean agencies like this are not free to set their own rules when a law is ambiguous?

And isnt the cap on number of households reached actually codified unambiguously in federal law?

Seems to me like this should not be allowed to happen.

Let me know if I am wrong.

> Doesn't that mean agencies like this are not free to set their own rules when a law is ambiguous?

Agencies can say whatever they want but courts are not required to defer to them when this inevitably goes to a lawsuit.

  • Thanks. That actually makes it make more sense, chevron doctrine applied to courts and what they can/can't do.

    Edit: made applies past tense

The difference in this case is that the victims are the general public, who don't even own a single lobbyist and can be safely ignored.