West Virginia’s Major Questions: Agency Deference, Nondelegation, and the EPA

Authors

Julian Klein

Document Type

Note

Abstract

(Excerpt)

In the landmark case Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council, the Supreme Court established that deference is shown to an agency’s reasonable construction of a statute where Congress has not directly addressed the precise issue. Since the 1984 decision, the Supreme Court had consistently applied the Chevron standard to EPA actions. It was not until West Virginia that the Court invoked the seldom used major questions doctrine to determine whether the EPA’s actions were legal.

This Note will explore key issues arising from the Court’s recent decision in West Virginia, including the major questions doctrine and its impact on the EPA’s rulemaking authority, Chevron, and nondelegation. Part I of this Note will provide overview on the EPA, the CAA, and the CPP. Part I will also discuss nondelegation, Chevron, and West Virginia, as well as introduce the major questions doctrine. Part II of this Note will argue that the CPP was a necessary action by the EPA in light of congressional inaction on greenhouse gas emissions. Part II will also argue that West Virginia marks the Court taking a more active role in interfering with the EPA’s decision-making. Part III of this Note will examine the doctrinal intersections between West Virginia and Chevron, statutory interpretation, and the nondelegation doctrine.