In this episode of Maine Coast Dock Talk, I chat with Drew Minkiewicz an attorney at Black Point Maritime Law about the Chevron doctrine and what the recent overturning of that landmark case means for fisheries management.
Some background:
The Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn the Chevron doctrine will have ripping impacts over the next decade, particularly for industries like fisheries that have layers upon layers of federal regulations. For nearly 40 years, the Chevron doctrine allowed agencies like NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) to interpret ambiguous laws, giving them the flexibility to manage complex ecosystems and fishing interests.
The Court’s decision means that judges will no longer defer to these agencies’ expertise when the law is unclear. Instead, the courts will take a more active role in interpreting statutes themselves, which could have some serious implications for fisheries management.
Interestingly, the case that got Chevron in front of the Supreme Court, was also connected to fisheries.
Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo involved a dispute between a group of fishing companies, led by Loper Bright Enterprises, and the U.S. federal government. The companies challenged a rule issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), which required them to pay for federal observers on their fishing vessels. These observers are meant to monitor compliance with regulations, but the companies argued that the law did not explicitly authorize NMFS to impose these costs on them.
Further listening
One of my favorite podcasts, The Indicator, did a two-part series on the history of the Chevron Doctrine and a look to what the future might look like now that Chevron is gone. There were a few details they got wrong on the fisheries side (and they are not focused on fisheries impacts) but they are helpful companion listens to this podcast. they are also both under ten minutes each
Comments