Washington (EFE)
The so-called Chevron doctrine, in the crosshairs of the conservative Supreme Court judges, forces the courts to yield to federal agencies when interpreting laws that are not clear.
This precedent was established in 1984 in a case that pitted the Chevron company against the Natural Resources Defense Council, and has been criticized by judges who consider that it gives too much power to Washington.
The doctrine will be reviewed after the high court has admitted reviewing an appeal from a group of herring fishermen who argue that the National Fisheries Service does not have the authority to require them to pay the salaries of federal inspectors who travel aboard their vessels. .
Since 1976, these observers have been able to join crews to ensure they comply with regulations, but since 2020, the government has required fishermen to pay the salaries of these inspectors.
From the fishing industry to US federal agencies.
Four family businesses sued the Commerce Department three years ago over that requirement and the Supreme Court will decide on their appeal, something that could have consequences that go far beyond the fishing industry, affecting the power of other federal agencies.
The case will be heard in the next hearing period, which will begin in October, and a sentence is likely to be issued in 2024.
The lawyer for the whistleblowers, Paul Clement, argued that the agency had exceeded its powers and that it needed authorization from Congress to demand the inspectors’ salaries.
Prosecutor Elizabeth Prelogar assured that the agency has acted within its powers.