Kisor v. Wilkie

Definition

Kisor v. Wilkie is a landmark Supreme Court case from 2019 that addressed the issue of deference given to administrative agencies when interpreting their own regulations. The ruling clarified the application of Auer deference, which allows courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of its own ambiguous regulations if certain criteria are met, thus impacting how environmental regulations and climate change policies are enforced and interpreted.

5 Must Know Facts For Your Next Test

1. In Kisor v. Wilkie, the Supreme Court upheld Auer deference but set forth a more rigorous standard for its application, emphasizing the need for agencies to show that their interpretations are not only reasonable but also consistent with the regulatory text.
2. The case involved a veteran who was denied retroactive disability benefits due to an ambiguous regulation regarding the definition of 'in-service' events related to military service.
3. The ruling reinforced the importance of courts conducting a thorough analysis before granting Auer deference, which could lead to greater scrutiny of administrative agency decisions, especially in environmental regulation.
4. The decision sparked debate about the balance between judicial review and agency expertise, particularly in the context of rapidly evolving environmental challenges like climate change.
5. The Kisor v. Wilkie ruling may influence future litigation surrounding environmental regulations by shaping how courts interpret agency rules and whether those interpretations will receive judicial deference.

Review Questions

• How did Kisor v. Wilkie modify the application of Auer deference in judicial reviews of administrative regulations?
  • Kisor v. Wilkie modified Auer deference by establishing a more stringent standard for courts to apply when determining whether to defer to an agency's interpretation of its own regulations. The Supreme Court emphasized that deference should only be granted if the agency's interpretation is reasonable and consistent with the regulatory text, requiring courts to engage in a deeper analysis before accepting an agency's view. This change may result in increased scrutiny of agency interpretations, impacting how environmental regulations are enforced.
• Discuss the implications of Kisor v. Wilkie on environmental regulation and how it could affect future climate change litigation.
  • Kisor v. Wilkie has significant implications for environmental regulation as it emphasizes the necessity for courts to carefully evaluate agency interpretations of ambiguous regulations before granting deference. This can lead to more rigorous judicial review of administrative decisions, potentially resulting in outcomes that require agencies to provide clearer regulatory guidance on environmental issues. As climate change litigation becomes increasingly prevalent, the principles established in Kisor may influence how courts assess agency actions related to environmental policies, affecting enforcement and compliance.
• Evaluate the potential long-term effects of Kisor v. Wilkie on the relationship between federal agencies and the judiciary in environmental governance.
  • The long-term effects of Kisor v. Wilkie on federal agencies and the judiciary could reshape environmental governance significantly. By reinforcing a more critical approach to Auer deference, this ruling may lead to a decrease in judicial trust in agency interpretations, compelling agencies to provide clearer, more precise regulations. Consequently, this heightened scrutiny could drive agencies to improve their rule-making processes and engagement with public stakeholders, ultimately impacting how effectively environmental laws address issues such as climate change while ensuring that regulations are implemented in a legally sound manner.

Related terms

Auer Deference: A legal principle that compels courts to defer to an agency's interpretation of its own regulations unless that interpretation is unreasonable.

Chevron Deference: A doctrine where courts defer to an agency's interpretation of a statute it administers, provided the statute is ambiguous and the agency's interpretation is reasonable.

Administrative Procedure Act: A federal statute that governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations, providing guidelines for public participation and transparency.