Law Center Search Results

The NAM filed an amicus brief in support of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in a case involving judicial deference to administrative agencies’ interpretations of their own regulations. The case arose from a veteran’s lawsuit against the Veterans’ Administration over his post-service benefits. The sole legal question before the Supreme Court is whether the landmark case of Auer v. Robbins (S. Ct. 1997) should be overturned. Auer held that reviewing courts should give “extreme deference” to administrative agencies’ interpretations of their own regulations. This so-called “Auer deference” allows agencies to promulgate vague regulations then enjoy broad judicial deference to their own interpretation of their regulation. This case has important implications for manufacturers because a favorable ruling by the Supreme Court would discourage agencies from promulgating vague regulations and would give more certainty to manufacturers that their own reasonable interpretations of regulations will be upheld in response to a government enforcement proceeding or other regulatory action. The NAM’s brief in support of certiorari explained how extreme judicial deference to agencies harms manufacturers. On December 10, 2018, the Court granted certiorari to hear the case. The NAM then submitted an amicus brief on the merits that reinforced our arguments for why the doctrine should be abolished. On June 26, 2019, the Court declined to overrule the doctrine but substantially narrowed its application. This ruling will result in more regulatory certainty and clarity for manufacturers.