Judicial Deference AMA

Judicial Deference:

Navigate through this content:

• Syllabus/Course Contents
• Video: Introduction to Judicial Deference
• Reading 1: Cynthia R. Farina, "Statutory Interpretation and the Balance of Power in the Administrative State"
  • Link to the Reading
  • Video: About the reading (~5 min)
  • Reflect on "go deeper" questions for self-study
• Reading 2: Jonathan R. Siegel, "The Constitutional Case for Chevron Deference"
  • Link to the Reading
  • Video: About the reading (~5 min)
  • Reflect on "go deeper" questions for self-study
• Reading 3: Michael Kagan, "Loud and Soft Anti-Chevron Decisions"
  • Reading
  • Video: About the reading (~5 min)
  • Reflect on "go deeper" questions for self-study
• Expert Interview: Kent Barnett
• Expert Interview: Adam White
• Expert Q and A
• Further Reading
• Feedback Survey

Expert AMA (Ask Me Anything) with Ballotpedia Administrative State Team

Listen to an expert question and answer session recorded with members of Ballotpedia's Administrative State team! Join our team as they discuss the types of judicial deference, possible reform solutions, the future of judicial deference, and more.

List of Questions:

1. In the face of ambiguities that give rise to deference, how do scholars think that Congress, agencies, and the judiciary should address those statutory ambiguities?
2. Jonathan Siegel seemed to argue that judges do not relinquish their Article III duty to interpret the law by deferring to administrative agency interpretations. What do other scholars think about this?
3. The readings for this course focused heavily on Chevron deference but I know there are other types. Can you say a little bit about them and what do legal theorists think about them relative to Chevron? Are there some that are considered more acceptable than others?
4. Who do scholars think is more responsible for the current state of deference to agency interpretations: Congress or the courts?
5. What do you think about the argument that deference violates due process because it requires judges to “exercise systematically biased judgment in favor of the government”?
6. Can you say more about why some think the future is uncertain for judicial deference?

Terms mentioned in the video:

• De novo review: De novo (Latin for "from the new"), in the context of administrative law, is a standard of judicial review in which a federal court examines an executive agency action, such as a regulation or an adjudicatory decision, without deference to a previous interpretation of the underlying statute in question.
• Habeus Corpus: Habeas corpus, Latin for "you should have the body," is a legal action, or writ, to bring a prisoner before a judge to determine if his or her detention is lawful. The writ of habeas corpus has been described as "the fundamental instrument for safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary and lawless state action," by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Mentioned court cases:

• Kisor v. Wilkie - Kisor v. Wilkie was a 2019 United States Supreme Court case that upheld the idea that courts should defer to an agency's reasonable interpretation of its own ambiguous regulations in limited circumstances. The case explored whether the court should overturn Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co. (1945) and Auer v. Robbins (1997), both of which figure prominently in the expansion of the administrative state. The court decided to keep those precedents but articulated the narrow range of agency regulatory interpretations that qualify for Auer deference.

Mentioned books:

• Tocqueville's Nightmare: The Administrative State Emerges in America, 1900-1940 by Daniel Ernst