{
  "id": "R43203",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R43203",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 423786,
      "date": "2013-08-28",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T23:17:40.129647",
      "title": "Chevron Deference: Court Treatment of Agency Interpretations of Ambiguous Statutes",
      "summary": "An administrative agency may generally only exercise that authority which is provided to it by Congress. Often, however, congressional delegations of authority are imprecise, and, as a result, agencies must construe ambiguous terms and make interpretive decisions in order to implement Congress\u2019s delegation. The Supreme Court, in Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, outlined a limited role for courts in reviewing these types of agency interpretations. The now famous \u201cChevron two-step\u201d test has been arguably the most important pillar of administrative law since the decision was handed down in 1984.\nWhen evaluating whether an agency\u2019s interpretation of a statute is valid a court must first look to the language of the statute. If the statutory language is clear, the test stops\u2014the agency must follow, and the court must enforce, the clear and unambiguous commands that Congress provides through statute. However, if a court determines that the statutory language is \u201csilent or ambiguous,\u201d then the court may proceed to step two of the Chevron test. Step two requires a reviewing court to determine whether the agency\u2019s interpretation \u201cis based on a permissible construction of the statute.\u201d The Supreme Court noted that a reviewing court should not impose its own construction of a statute in place of a reasonable interpretation provided by the agency, but should grant the agency\u2019s interpretation deference under step two of the Chevron test.\nRecently the Supreme Court ruled on the scope of Chevron deference in City of Arlington v. FCC. The Court established that a court must provide an agency with Chevron deference even when the agency is determining the scope of its own jurisdiction to take regulatory action under a statute.\nThis report will discuss the Chevron decision; explain when Chevron deference applies; highlight common agency statutory interpretations that generally do not receive deference under Chevron; and review the recent Supreme Court opinion in City of Arlington v. FCC which clarified the applicability of Chevron deference to circumstances in which an agency is interpreting the scope of its own jurisdiction.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R43203",
          "sha1": "ae5cc5058331c166702741a274e7474e7f157871",
          "filename": "files/20130828_R43203_ae5cc5058331c166702741a274e7474e7f157871.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R43203",
          "sha1": "72c42c05b98e0188033dd6c53c9eea5267a39140",
          "filename": "files/20130828_R43203_72c42c05b98e0188033dd6c53c9eea5267a39140.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Environmental Policy"
  ]
}