“The U.S. Supreme Court [last] Wednesday appeared divided over a bid to further limit the regulatory powers of federal agencies in a dispute involving a government-run program to monitor for overfishing of herring off New England's coast… [Two fishing] companies have asked the court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, to rein in or overturn a precedent established in 1984 that calls for judges to defer to federal agency interpretation of U.S. laws deemed to be ambiguous.” Reuters
“The doctrine at the center of the case is known as the Chevron doctrine. It is named after the Supreme Court’s 1984 opinion in Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, upholding a regulation issued by the Environmental Protection Agency. Justice John Paul Stevens set out a two-part test for courts to review an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers. The court must first determine whether Congress has directly addressed the question at the center of the case. If it has not, the court must uphold the agency’s interpretation of the statute as long as it is reasonable.” SCOTUSblog
The right urges the Court to overturn Chevron, arguing that Congress, not agencies, should determine policies.