That is false. Please don't spread misinformation. Chevron had nothing to do with how legislatures write laws.
The prevalence of extreme propaganda on this site is getting really tiresome.
It is an objective, inarguable fact that neither Chevron nor Loper had anything at all to do with the ability of Congress or state legislatures to distinguish between intent and implementation.
Not parent, but Chevron was about deference to agencies, not about whether courts should adhere to legislative intent. The original Chevron ruling was written by a well-known originalist, who usually didn't abide by legislative intent.
i've skimmed it, that's what i got out of it, but i'm no lawyer. if you aren't going to clearly express your intent here i must continue to rely on my interpretation
HN is for intellectual curiosity, and not for ideological battle.
If you are going to insist on spewing political talking points instead of reading the opinion, all while refusing to take into account an expert in the field—an attorney for a federal agency—telling you that you're wrong, then you should reconsider whether you belong here.
The prevalence of extreme propaganda on this site is getting really tiresome.
It is an objective, inarguable fact that neither Chevron nor Loper had anything at all to do with the ability of Congress or state legislatures to distinguish between intent and implementation.