No. of Recommendations: 1
I agree that's why we have courts - but under Chevron, the courts would be required to get out of the way and defer to what the agency interpreted the statute to mean.
This. For literally any other dispute with another party you would adjudicate it via the courts but in the 1980's the judicial branch with Chevron said, "Not us, bro" and the modern administrative state was able to combine elements of all three branches of government (rules instead of laws passed by Congress, in-house judgements instead of through the courts and of course their own native executive branch enforcement mechanisms) into 1 thing.
All this does is break that apart into what the system already is for 99% of disputes.
