This is the Libertarian Podcast from the Hoover Institution. I'm your host Tom Church and I'm joined as always by the Libertarian Professor Richard Epstein.

Richard is the Peter and Kirsten Bedford senior fellow here at the Hoover Institution

he's the Lawrence A Tish Professor of Law at NYU and he's also a senior lecturer

at the University of Chicago and today we're talking about the potential

for the Supreme Court to limit the Chevron doctrine. That is, I would say, the level

to which courts defer to federal agencies interpretations of legislative statutes or maybe I'd

rather say how much administrative agencies take on legislative responsibilities that maybe

they shouldn't be.

So Richard, there are two cases we're talking about

that were in front of the Supreme Court. It's Relentless versus Department of Commerce

and Loper Bright Industries versus Raimondo and both have to do with the same issue and I know you'll you'll take us

through that and so I'd like you to give us the background here on how does this how

how do these cases interact with one another how would Chevron deference perhaps be limited and

also what are the reactions from the justices I mean with a new court up and this issue actually being discussed and

being ruled on what might we end up seeing? Well let's just start with the last

thing Chevron is clearly on its last legs.

One of the most telling remarks of the oral argument was when Justice Roberts said,

we haven't been using Chevron for the last couple of years anyhow so why are we worried about it.

That's a kind of a subtle signal that there's going to be a formal interment of a doctrine which has been

on his last leg say since about 2020.

Why is this case an appropriate vehicle for that? Because it not only

involves statutory interpretation, but it also involves a very important issue, namely

...