For decades runners have benefitted from the expertise of federal agencies in defending threats to both public health and public lands and protecting the people and places we love. A recent Supreme Court decision just made that work a heck of a lot tougher and we at RPL are preparing for the implications for our work. Read on to learn more about the Chevron Deference and how it impacts public lands.
What is the Chevron Deference and how does the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn this impact the climate crisis?
In 1984, the Supreme Court issued its landmark “Chevron” decision, which gave judicial deference to the expertise of federal agencies when their rules and regulations are challenged in court. The need for such a decision came from a conundrum with how our government is structured: the Constitution tasks Congress with enacting laws that advance the public welfare, but members of Congress are not scientific experts and usually make somewhat vague laws. The solution was to give more authority to federal agencies to develop regulations that would implement these broader pieces of legislation. For example, it has long been assumed that the Environmental Protection Agency has broad authority to interpret the Clean Air Act in order to effectively carry out its mandate to protect public health from hazardous air pollution.
But does that same authority extend to regulations that address the climate crisis? For half a century, the Chevron decision has made it difficult for industries like Big Oil to challenge regulations that force them to better protect public health and the environment. But in June of this year, the Supreme Court essentially overturned the Chevron decision in a case that has far-reaching implications for running communities, open spaces, and the climate. Judicial deference to agency expertise is greatly diminished, and we will likely see important regulations—such as those that limit fossil fuel extraction on public lands—be challenged and potentially overturned in court
How is the Chevron decision impacting policies that Runners for Public Lands and other outdoor advocacy organizations have worked hard to support?
Among the first rules to be challenged partially citing the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision to overturn the Chevron Deference is the Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Public Lands Rule.
The Public Lands Rule was an effort by the BLM to put conservation on an equal footing with other “multiple uses” of public land such as energy development, mining, and livestock grazing. The BLM is the largest landholder in the U.S., managing 245 million acres of public lands. However, less than 15% of lands managed by the BLM are protected for conservation that benefits other important values such as wildlife and outdoor recreation activities like running.
Citing the recent U.S. Supreme Court’s Chevron decision, a coalition of lawmakers are now calling to overturn the BLM Public Lands Rule on the basis that BLM no longer has the administrative authority to implement this Rule. This action is the first indication of how the changing administrative and legal post-Chevron government landscape can directly affect efforts by Runners for Public Lands and other organizations, such as the Outdoor Alliance, as we advocate for policies that benefit runners and outdoor recreationists. To take a deeper dive into the many years of work that Outdoor Alliance has done to support the BLM Public Lands Rule click here.
To stay informed on how Chevron Deference and other recent government changes may impact environmental and recreation policies runners care about follow along on our social media and future newsletters
To stay informed on how the Chevron Deference and other recent government changes may impact environmental and recreation policies runners care about, you can see a few resources below, but make sure to follow along on our social media and future newsletters.
- Repeal of the Chevron doctrine will have profound consequences for federal rulemaking — High Country News
- What does the BLM’s Public Lands Rule mean for outdoor recreation (via Outdoor Alliance)
- Chevron Overruled: Understanding the Supreme Court’s Decision in Loper Bright v. Raimondo and Relentless, Inc. v. Dep’t of Commerce and what it could mean for regulated communities (via K&L Gates)
- After Chevron: What the Supreme Court’s Loper Bright Decision Changed, and What It Didn’t (via Cleary Gottlieb)
- The Impact of Losing Chevron Deference (via Carbon Tracker)