Seton Hall Law Review Symposium Explores the End of Chevron Deference
(L:R) Michael Coenen, Seton Hall University School of Law; Bernard Bell, Rutgers Law School; Anya Bernstein, University of Connecticut School of Law; Seth Davis, University of California Berkeley Law
On February 14, 2025, legal scholars, practitioners, and students convened for the Seton Hall Law Review, Volume 55, Symposium. This year’s event, titled The End of Chevron Deference: Navigating Federal Administrative Law in the Wake of Loper Bright, examined the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and its implications for federal administrative law.
Each year, the Law Review hosts a symposium where experts engage in discussions on pressing legal issues. These gatherings foster dialogue, challenge assumptions, and introduce new perspectives on complex areas of law. By bringing together scholars, attorneys, policymakers, and students, the symposium provides platform for intriguing discourse and critical analysis.
The End of Chevron Deference: A Defining Shift
On June 28, 2024, the Supreme Court issued a decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, overturning Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. and rejecting decades of judicial deference to administrative agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutes. In response to this shift in administrative law, Emma Taylor ’25, Volume 55’s Symposium Editor, structured the event around four key panels, each examining the decision’s consequences across various sectors.
Panel 1: A New Era of Administrative Law
The first panel set the stage by providing an in-depth overview of the Loper Bright decision. Scholars dissected the reasoning behind the Court’s ruling and its departure from the longstanding Chevron framework. Panelists then debated how this shift would impact the judiciary’s role in statutory interpretation. Some argued that courts would now exercise greater scrutiny over agency decisions, while others questioned whether Loper Bright would meaningfully alter judicial analysis. If anything, they noted, courts will now place greater emphasis on statutory interpretation when determining ambiguity.
Panel 2: Effects on Energy, Infrastructure, and Environmental Policy
The second panel explored the decision’s effects on energy regulation, infrastructure development, and environmental policy. Experts discussed how regulatory agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy will have to navigate legal challenges without the deference they once received. The panelists expressed concerns that the decision could lead to increased litigation and regulatory uncertainty, raising questions about whether judges possess the technical expertise to assess complex environmental and energy-related regulations.
Panel 3: Impacts on Financial Regulation and Policy
The third panel examined the effects of Loper Bright on financial regulation, particularly its implications for agencies like the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). The panelists discussed how courts might now play a more prominent role in determining the scope of financial regulations, potentially influencing investor protections, banking oversight, and corporate compliance measures. Given the SEC’s unique role in market regulation, however, the experts argued that the end of Chevron deference would likely have minimal impact on financial markets.
Panel 4: Regulatory and Policy Considerations for Health Care and Life Sciences
The final panel addressed how Loper Bright would affect health care and life sciences regulation. Agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) might need to adjust their rulemaking strategies going forward. Interestingly, one scholar presented innovative approaches litigants could use to leverage Loper Bright in challenging existing health care regulations.
A Dynamic and Insightful Discussion
Throughout the day, symposium attendees engaged in lively discussions on the far-reaching consequences of the Supreme Court’s decision. Myron Minn-Thu-Aye ’25, Editor in Chief of the Law Review, remarked:
"It was so interesting to hear both academics and practicing attorneys discuss the potential implications of the Loper Bright decision in a variety of legal fields. The discussions were really lively and highlighted many nuances in analyzing what changes the end of Chevron deference is and isn't bringing to the work of government agencies."
As the Symposium concluded, participants left with a deeper understanding of the evolving
landscape of administrative law and the potential challenges ahead. The Symposium
highlighted the importance of legal scholarship in navigating this new era of regulatory
interpretation. Fittingly, the Symposium took place on Valentine’s Day—proving that
for Seton Hall Law students, there’s no better way to celebrate their love for the
law than by engaging in thought-provoking dialogue.
For more information, please contact:
Seton Hall Law School
