Chevron's Foundation

40 Pages Posted: 17 Oct 2009 Last revised: 18 Feb 2019

See all articles by Mark Seidenfeld

Mark Seidenfeld

Florida State University College of Law

Date Written: October 16, 2009

Abstract

This Article addresses the question of how a court can justify deferring to an administrative agency interpretation of a statute under the Chevron doctrine given the accepted understanding that Article III of the Constitution makes the judiciary the ultimate decider of the meaning of law in any case or controversy that is properly before a court. It further considers the ramifications of the answer to that question on the potential forms that any doctrine of interpretive deference may assume.

This Article first rejects congressional intent to delegate interpretive primacy to agencies as the basis for Chevron. It argues that such intent is an unsupportable fiction that distracts attention from judicial responsibility for the Chevron doctrine. Instead, it posits that Chevron is better viewed as a doctrine of judicial self-restraint under the courts' Article III responsibilities. It then analyzes how this view of Chevron might influence when and how the doctrine should operate.

Keywords: Chevron, Statutory Interpretation, Judicial Review, Deference

Suggested Citation

Seidenfeld, Mark, Chevron's Foundation (October 16, 2009). 86 Notre Dame L. Rev. 141 (2011), FSU College of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 403, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1489982 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1489982

Mark Seidenfeld (Contact Author)

Florida State University College of Law ( email )

425 W. Jefferson Street
Tallahassee, FL 32306
United States
850-644-3059 (Phone)
850-644-5487 (Fax)

HOME PAGE: http://www.law.fsu.edu/faculty/mseidenfeld.html

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
268
Abstract Views
2,028
Rank
209,269
PlumX Metrics