Chevron Has Only One Step

14 Pages Posted: 28 Aug 2008 Last revised: 16 Sep 2008

Date Written: August 27, 2008

Abstract

Chevron, U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council lays out a two-step process that courts must follow when they review a federal agency's construction of a federal statute. We argue that Chevron, rightly understood, has only one step. The single question is whether the agency's construction is permissible as a matter of statutory interpretation. The two Chevron steps both ask this question, just in different ways, and are thus mutually convertible: any opinion written in terms of one step can be written, without loss of content, in terms of the other step. Chevron's artificial division of a unitary inquiry causes material confusion among commentators and courts, and has no benefits; administrative law should jettison the two-step framework.

Suggested Citation

Stephenson, Matthew Caleb and Vermeule, Adrian, Chevron Has Only One Step (August 27, 2008). Harvard Public Law Working Paper No. 08-24, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1259816 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1259816

Matthew Caleb Stephenson

Harvard Law School ( email )

1575 Massachusetts
Hauser 406
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States
617-495-9863 (Phone)

Adrian Vermeule (Contact Author)

Harvard Law School ( email )

1525 Massachusetts
Griswold 500
Cambridge, MA 02138
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
628
Abstract Views
5,054
Rank
78,189
PlumX Metrics