Destabilized But Not Yet Deconstructed: Analysis of This Momentous SCOTUS Term for the Administrative State

By Conn Maciel Carey’s national OSHA Practice Group

The 2023-2024 Term of the United States Supreme Court will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications in a number of areas, but perhaps most significantly—at least for regular readers of the OSHA Defense Report blog—with respect to the ability of federal agencies to promulgate and enforce regulations.  In a trio of recent decisions addressing federally mandated monitors in fishing vessels (Loper Bright v. Raimondo), civil fines imposed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC v. Jarkesy) and payment network processing fees incurred by a truck stop (Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System), the High Court sent shockwaves that will likely reverberate through all federal agencies and the regulated community alike for years to come.

The familiar framework in which these agencies have long operated, dating back to the mid-1980s when Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. was decided, appears to have been upended, or at least is now resting on shaky ground. And while these three decisions do not, by themselves, dismantle the administrative state, they have the potential to significantly reorder the familiar foundations upon which OSHA and dozens of other administrative agencies have operated.

Perhaps most importantly, these decisions appear to open the door wide for future challenges to vast swaths of the Code of Federal Regulations that currently govern how businesses and other regulated entities operate today and the venue where regulatory disputes are resolved. This article examines the implications of these cases and offers some educated speculation about the sea change that may occur at OSHA and elsewhere over the next few years. Continue reading