Even when the Supreme Court changes course, lower courts don’t always follow orders. Old dogs don’t like new tricks. A typical example is Heller. Even after the Supreme Court recognized an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, lower courts actively resisted the case for more than a decade. The judge doesn’t like guns, and Heller Not much has changed. Nearly every gun control measure has withstood scrutiny. Not much changed before and after Heller. Maybe the bridge However, this change is only a temporary respite Laxmi More of the same may be coming.
will Loper Bright Treated in a similar manner? For decades, lower court judges have been content to defer to the executive branch on thorny legal issues. and Chevron Having disappeared, the courts now have to find the “best” answer. (I’ve been thinking about Melania Trump’s “Be the Best” campaign). In the Chief Justice’s view, this task will involve independent legal judgment. But do we really know whether judges take it for granted that the answer provided by the government is the “best” answer? After all, they have the necessary expertise. call it Chevron In exile.
How much will it change because of what? Loper Bright? I know there are a lot of empirical studies on how often governments win when: Chevron To be applied for; to be applied. Chief Justice Roberts mocked one such study by Kent Barnett, Christina Boyd, and Chris Walker:
The dissent adds, citing an empirical study Chevron “Nurturing protocol between judges. postal,28 years old. ChevronThe second step should be to accept the agency’s explanation. So when the judges arrive on site They tend to think the agency won. This does not demonstrate the simplicity or predictability of identifying ambiguities.
Perhaps in a few years, a similar study of the new system could be conducted. Has there been a significant change in the administration’s win-loss ratio? How often Loper Bright Does it really change things?
