Introducing our newest Learning Journey on deference
We’re excited to debut our eighth Learning Journey. As a refresher, our Learning Journeys give you a series of daily emails with information, examples, and exercises to help you broaden your knowledge of U.S. government and politics and help you understand each aspect of a particular concept.
Our most recent journey is on judicial deference. In the context of administrative law, deference applies when a federal court yields to an agency’s interpretation of either a statute that Congress instructed the agency to administer or a regulation promulgated by the agency.
Our Learning Journey here is a 4-day overview of deference in the context of the administrative state. We cover the most commonly applied federal deference doctrines—including Chevron deference, Auer deference, and Skidmore deference—and examine the different approaches to deference in the states. Our journey also features leading support and opposition arguments from administrative law scholars, a look at the future of deference, and various reform proposals. Auer deference—which requires courts to accept an agency’s interpretation of its own ambiguous regulation—was the key principle considered in the Supreme Court’s review of Kisor v. Wilkie this past term.
Last week, we introduced a Learning Journey on judicial review, which refers to the power of courts to interpret the law and overturn any legislative or executive actions that are inconsistent with the law. The concept of judicial review dates back to the Supreme Court’s decision in Marbury v. Madison in 1803, which held that “a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law.” Judicial review is a key concept in administrative law and deference is a principle of judicial review.
If you want to learn more about these principles, taking one of our Learning Journeys is a smart—and free—way to do so. Just click the link below to get started.