The Politics of Selecting Chevron Deference

27 Pages Posted: 13 Jun 2017 Last revised: 17 Feb 2023

See all articles by Kent H. Barnett

Kent H. Barnett

University of Georgia School of Law

Christina L. Boyd

Washington University in St. Louis - Washington University in St. Louis - School of Law

Christopher J. Walker

University of Michigan Law School

Date Written: June 10, 2017

Abstract

In this paper, we examine an important threshold question in judicial behavior and administrative law: when do federal circuit courts decide to use the Chevron deference framework and when do they select a framework that is less deferential to the administrative agency’s statutory interpretation? The question is important because the purpose of Chevron deference is to give agencies — not judges — policymaking space within statutory interpretation. We expect, nonetheless, that whether to invoke the Chevron framework is largely driven by political dynamics, with judges adopting a less deferential standard when their political preferences do not align with the agency’s decision. To provide insight, we analyze circuit-court decisions from 2003 until 2013 that review agency statutory interpretations. Our results — from the largest and most comprehensive database of its kind — provide partial confirmation of our expectations. When courts reviewed liberal agency interpretations, all panels — liberal, moderate, and conservative — were equally likely to apply Chevron. But when reviewing conservative agency interpretations, liberal panels selected the Chevron deference framework significantly less frequently than conservative panels. Contrary to limited prior studies, we find no evidence of “whistleblower” or disciplining effects when judges of different judicial ideologies comprised the panel. Viewed together, our results provide important implications for the current debate on whether to eliminate, narrow, or clarify Chevron’s domain.

Keywords: Administrative Law, Deference, Judicial Review, Chevron, Skidmore

Suggested Citation

Barnett, Kent Harris and Boyd, Christina L. and Walker, Christopher J., The Politics of Selecting Chevron Deference (June 10, 2017). 15 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 597–619 (2018)., University of Georgia School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2017-21, Ohio State Public Law Working Paper No. 400, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2984302

Kent Harris Barnett

University of Georgia School of Law ( email )

225 Herty Drive
Athens, GA 30602
United States

Christina L. Boyd

Washington University in St. Louis - Washington University in St. Louis - School of Law ( email )

1 Brookings Drive
St. Louis, MO 63130
United States

Christopher J. Walker (Contact Author)

University of Michigan Law School ( email )

625 South State Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1215
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.chrisjwalker.com

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
694
Abstract Views
5,303
Rank
71,969
PlumX Metrics