Saving Seafood

Despite commercial fishers’ US Supreme Court victory, district court upholds at-sea observers rule

July 22, 2o25 — A U.S. District Court has upheld a rule requiring commercial fishers to pay for at-sea monitors, despite the case playing a role in the U.S. Supreme Court overturning the Chevron deference last year.

The Chevron deference is a longstanding judicial precedent that instructed courts to give federal agencies wide latitude in interpreting the laws passed by Congress. While the Supreme Court ruled in favor of two separate lawsuits brought by commercial fishermen in overturning the Chevron deference, the lower U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island has determined that the fishing regulation at the heart of one of those cases will remain in place.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

Justice Department in Talks to Settle Loper Bright

July 21, 2025 — Sometimes, a little sunlight does some good. As I reported last month, even while Pam Bondi’s Justice Department has been treating Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo as a victory for conservative and MAGA critics of the administrative state, career lawyers at the DOJ were continuing to defend the very Commerce Department fishing-monitor regulation at issue in Loper Bright and its companion case, Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce. On Tuesday, a federal judge ruled in favor of the government in Relentless, concluding that the Commerce Department could saddle fishing boats with the cost of monitors even without any authorization in the statutory text for charging them such a fee: “The default norm, manifest without express statement in literally hundreds of regulations, is that the government does not reimburse regulated entities for the cost of complying with properly enacted regulations, at least short of a taking.” Never mind that this isn’t a matter of the boats bearing the costs of their own compliance with rules, but of paying a regulatory agent for the government. The judge also found that, because the Magnuson-Stevens Act gives the agency “necessary and appropriate” powers, this “in no uncertain terms, delegates . . . a large degree of discretionary authority.” Actually, a term could hardly be more uncertain, and the whole point of Loper Bright is that agency discretion is about policy — not the interpretation of the law.

Read the full article at the National Review

US seafood industry set for spike in court battles in the wake of Chevron’s overturning

March 19, 2025 — Last June, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron deference – a legal precedent stemming from the 1980s that gave federal agencies wide latitude in interpreting congressional statutes.

That move, according to Robert Smith, a partner at Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A.-based law firm K&L Gates, could turn the U.S. seafood industry into a more litigious environment in the near future.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

The Little Boats that Could: Supreme Court Rules for Fishermen in Observer Case

July 1, 2024 — William Bright, Wayne Reichle, and Stefan Axelsson manage commercial fishing businesses in New Jersey, targeting Atlantic herring. For many years, fishermen like Bill, Wayne, and Stefan have been required to carry federal observers on their vessels when venturing into the Atlantic to catch herring. These observers are mandated to ensure that the fishermen comply with legal catch limits, aiming to prevent overfishing.

However, in 2020, NOAA Fisheries overreached the authority granted to the agency by law, and decided that herring fishermen should directly pay the observers’ salaries, potentially costing them up to $700 per day. According to estimates, the cost of the observers could amount to over 20 percent of the revenue from their catch.

Consequently, Reichle, Bright, and Axelsson filed a lawsuit against the federal government in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

“From the beginning, the most important thing for us was the ability to continue fishing and continue operating the way we’ve operated for a number of years,” Wayne Reichle told Scripps News.

Meghan Lapp, fisheries liaison at Seafreeze Ltd. in Point Judith, Rhode Island, homeport of the fishing vessel Relentless, faced similar issues. Ms. Lapp noted that their complaints went through fisheries council meetings and NOAA officials, but to no avail.

“I was ignored the entirety of the time because the agency knew it would have deference if it ever got to court,” Ms. Lapp told National Fisherman. Thus, they filed Relentless, Inc. v. Department of Commerce.

The implications of these cases extend far beyond the shores of New Jersey and Rhode Island. 

Today, in its decision on Loper Bright and Relentless, the Supreme Court has overturned “Chevron deference,” a 40-year-old legal precedent. 

“If the intent of Congress is clear, that is the end of the matter; for the court, as well as the agency, must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress,” Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for a 6-0 court in the 1984 Chevron opinion. But “if the statute is silent or ambiguous with respect to the specific issue,” the Chevron precedent dictated that courts should defer to interpretations by the agency charged with implementing the law.

Chevron has long been criticized by some, particularly conservatives, for granting excessive power to federal agencies and unelected officials. By this decision, the Court significantly limits the authority of agencies to interpret ambiguity in statutes, and use that ambiguity to create regulations that can affect extensive areas of American life and commerce. Writing for the majority, Chief Justice John Roberts stated, “Chevron is overruled. Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.

Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the Senate’s No. 2 Democrat, expressed disappointment, telling the Wall Street Journal that “Federal agencies use the latest scientific analyses and expert opinions to implement widely popular programs that ensure safe food and medications, clean air and water, stable financial markets, fair working conditions, and more.”

If Federal agencies always used the latest science appropriately, never overstepped their bounds, and never allowed appointed or unelected career officials to enact their own agendas, Senator Durbin would be 100 percent correct. But that is not always the case. If James Madison were alive today, he might say, “If regulators were angels, no limit on judicial deference would be necessary.”

As the ramifications of this decision propagate through the lower courts and agencies, perhaps it will become increasingly incumbent upon Congress to do its job, and write clear, detailed legislation. It may be optimistic, but if this ruling diminishes the habit of our elected officials to pass last-minute ambiguous legislation that leaves important details to unelected officials in agencies, it will be a good thing.

Congratulations to the owners, operators, and crew of these “little boats that could,” and to the attorneys who believed in them, and the merits of their case.

The decision is being covered extensively in the press.  Here are links to some of that coverage.

CNN: Supreme Court overturns 1984 Chevron precedent, curbing power of federal government

Associated Press: The Supreme Court weakens federal regulators, overturning decades-old Chevron decision

Washington Post: Supreme Court curbs federal agency power, overturning Chevron precedent

Wall Street Journal: Supreme Court Pares Back Federal Regulatory Power

Supreme Court rules for fishermen in landmark ‘Chevron deference’ case

July 1, 2024 — Herring fishermen in New Jersey and Rhode Island who objected to paying fees for fishery observers scored a victory in the U.S Supreme Court Friday that could upend 40 years of federal rulemaking.

The court’s 6-3 decision in the twin cases will have profound effects across U.S. government and industry, setting new limits on how executive branch agencies regulate energy, transportation, food and drugs and other health, safety and environmental rules.

Lawyers with conservative legal activist groups brought the cases, Loper Bright v. Department of Commerce and Relentless v. Department of Commerce, on behalf of fishermen who challenged a National Marine Fisheries Service rule that required them to carry onboard observers to monitor fishing, and pay costs for the observers contracted by NMFS, at up to $700 a day.

The cases hinged on the so-called “Chevron deference,” a landmark ruling in federal administrative law dating back to a 1984 dispute between the oil giant and environmental activists of the Natural Resources Defense Council. In that earlier Supreme Court decision, justices ruled that the courts should “defer” to executive agencies’ reasonable interpretations of federal statutes.

Read the full article at the National Fisherman

US Supreme Court overturns Chevron in blow to NOAA’s regulatory authority

June 28, 2024 — A lawsuit filed by New Jersey herring fishermen has struck a massive blow to the authority of U.S. regulators.

On 28 June, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff fishermen in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, overturning the long-standing Chevron deference – a legal precedent that gave federal agencies wide latitude in interpreting congressional statutes – and limiting the authority of NOAA Fisheries to implement regulations without clear guidance from lawmakers.

Read the full article at SeafoodSource

The Supreme Court weakens federal regulators, overturning decades-old Chevron decision

June 28, 2024 — The Supreme Court on Friday upended a 40-year-old decision that made it easier for the federal government to regulate the environment, public health, workplace safety and consumer protections, delivering a far-reaching and potentially lucrative victory to business interests.

The court’s six conservative justices overturned the 1984 decision colloquially known as Chevron, long a target of conservatives who have been motivated as much by weakening the regulatory state as social issues including abortion. The liberal justices were in dissent.

The case was the conservative-dominated court’s clearest and boldest repudiation yet of what critics of regulation call the administrative state.

Bill Bright, a Cape May, New Jersey-based fisherman who was part of the lawsuit, said the decision to overturn Chevron would help fishing businesses make a living. “Nothing is more important than protecting the livelihoods of our families and crews,” Bright said in a statement.

Read the full article at the Associated Press

Fishermen Land Major Supreme Court Victory Overruling Chevron Doctrine

June 28, 2024 — Today, attorneys for a group of New Jersey herring fishermen landed a significant victory at the Supreme Court.  With its ruling in Loper Bright v. Raimondo, the Court has overruled the Chevron doctrine and restored the balance of power between Congress and the Administration. The Loper Bright decision was issued alongside Relentless v Department of Commerce.

The fishermen in the Loper Bright case face an unlawful requirement imposed on them by an executive branch agency that could force them to surrender 20 percent of their earnings to pay at-sea monitors. Because that fee resulted from unlawful overreach and threatened their ability to make a living, the fishermen decided to challenge the requirement in court four years ago. After a split decision in the D.C. Circuit, the Supreme Court decided to review the Chevron doctrine, which is the legal theory the government cited to justify its controversial monitoring rule. For 40 years, Chevron has required federal courts to abdicate their constitutional role to interpret the law by deferring to agency interpretations of statutes whenever those same agencies deem the law “silent” or “ambiguous.” In practice, such deference permitted agencies to engage in egregious overreach, often at the expense of ordinary citizens.

James Valvo, Executive Director of Cause of Action Institute. “We’re gratified that the Court recognized Chevron’s perverse consequences and ruled in favor of our clients and all citizens whose livelihoods are threatened by an unaccountable bureaucracy. We look forward to any further steps that will be needed to ensure the unlawful industry-funded monitoring regime imposed on herring fishermen is finally taken off the books.”

Read the full article at LoperBrightCase.com

Supreme Court delivers blow to power of federal agencies, overturning 40-year-old precedent

June 28, 2024 — The Supreme Court on Friday overturned a 40-year-old precedent that has been a target of the right because it is seen as bolstering the power of “deep state” bureaucrats.

In a ruling involving a challenge to a fisheries regulation, the court consigned to history a 1984 ruling called Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council. That decision had said judges should defer to federal agencies in interpreting the law when the language of a statute is ambiguous, thereby giving regulatory flexibility to bureaucrats.

It is the latest in a series of rulings in which the conservative justices have taken aim at the power of federal agencies, including one on Thursday involving in-house Securities and Exchange Commission adjudications. The ruling was 6-3, with the conservative justices in the majority and liberal justices dissenting.

“Chevron is overruled,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.”

He said that the ruling does not cast into doubt prior cases that relied on the precedent, but going forward lower courts “may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous.”

Read the full article at NBC News