This is a Washington news story, published by Guardian, that relates primarily to Chevron news.
For more Washington news, you can click here:
more Washington newsFor more SCOTUS news, you can click here:
more SCOTUS newsFor more news from Guardian, you can click here:
more news from GuardianOtherweb, Inc is a public benefit corporation, dedicated to improving the quality of news people consume. We are non-partisan, junk-free, and ad-free. We use artificial intelligence (AI) to remove junk from your news feed, and allow you to select the best politics news, business news, entertainment news, and much more. If you like this article about SCOTUS, you might also like this article about
Chevron doctrine. We are dedicated to bringing you the highest-quality news, junk-free and ad-free, about your favorite topics. Please come every day to read the latest regulatory law news, FDA news, news about SCOTUS, and other high-quality news about any topic that interests you. We are working hard to create the best news aggregator on the web, and to put you in control of your news feed - whether you choose to read the latest news through our website, our news app, or our daily newsletter - all free!
supreme court decisionGuardian
•85% Informative
The 40-year-old legal framework, the Chevron doctrine, once directed courts to defer to the expertise of federal agencies.
In a far-reaching decision, the court’s conservative supermajority held last week in Loper Bright Enterprises v Raimondo and Relentless Inc v Department of Commerce .
The decision could have particularly resounding consequences for agencies with highly technical work, such as the FDA , the EPA and Centers for Medicare .
Administration agencies will still be able to put forth regulations, collect data and issue regulations and guidance.
The ruling could also supercharge court shopping’ when attorneys seek friendly venues.
Healthcare is already Washington ’s most monied industry group.
In 2023 , pharmaceutical and health products companies spent $ 382 m lobbying federal lawmakers.
VR Score
87
Informative language
86
Neutral language
64
Article tone
formal
Language
English
Language complexity
64
Offensive language
not offensive
Hate speech
not hateful
Attention-grabbing headline
not detected
Known propaganda techniques
not detected
Time-value
short-lived
External references
8
Source diversity
7
Affiliate links
no affiliate links