Saving Seafood

Court open to upholding US fishing monitor rule even without ‘Chevron’ doctrine

November 5, 2024 — A U.S. appeals court on Monday appeared open to upholding a federal rule requiring commercial fishermen to fund a program to monitor for overfishing of herring off New England’s coast even after the U.S. Supreme Court in that same case issued a landmark ruling curbing agencies’ regulatory power.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, during oral arguments, weighed the impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s June decision to scrap a 40-year-old legal doctrine that had required courts to defer to agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous laws they administer.

The 6-3 conservative majority U.S. Supreme Court nixed the doctrine, known as “Chevron deference,” after taking up an appeal by several commercial fishing companies of the D.C. Circuit panel’s 2-1 ruling in August 2022 that had relied on the doctrine to uphold the fishing rule.

The justices sent the case back to the D.C. Circuit to reassess the rule’s validity post-Chevron using their own judgment and for further arguments by the fishing companies, led by New Jersey-based Loper Bright Enterprises.

Read the full article at Reuters

How the Supreme Court rescued my NJ fishing firm that bureaucrats almost sank

July 2, 2024 — Wayne Reichle is president and owner of Lund’s Fisheries in Cape May, New Jersey. He was one of the small business owners who sued the federal government in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which resulted in the Supreme Court overturning Chevron deference. Wayne is the third generation in the seafood business. His grandfather was a fishing vessel owner and operator in Cape May, and he was followed by Wayne’s father, Jeff Reichle, who had a vision for expanding the business and helped pioneer several fisheries through his investments in shoreside processing and distribution.

The following excerpt was published by the New York Post:

The Supreme Court just sided with my New Jersey-based, family-owned fishing business — and may have even saved it.

That’s the reality of the court’s June 28 decision in a case called Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned the “Chevron doctrine” that gave unchecked power to federal bureaucrats.

I was one of the small business owners who sued the federal government in this case.

I didn’t know my lawsuit would go all the way to the Supreme Court, or that the justices would tackle a huge question like bureaucratic accountability and how our laws should be read.

I just wanted to stop a federal agency that threatened my ability to keep my family business afloat.

In early 2020, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration decided that herring boats like mine had to start paying for the federal monitors who sometimes ride along during fishing trips.

These monitors check to make sure we’re not catching more fish than we’re allowed to, and observe our fishing methods to confirm we’re following the rules.

I’m glad we have a federal law that empowered NOAA to create a monitoring program: That law helps keep fishing sustainable.

But nowhere in the law does it say that fishermen like me have to pay for the monitors.

It was long understood that the government should pay for them, since the government requires them.

Only the government can afford them, too: The monitors cost about $700 a day.

For our two fishing boats, this mandate could have forced us to pay for over 100 days of monitoring a year, totaling more than $70,000 — a huge expense for a small fishing business and the fishermen we work with.

What gives federal bureaucrats the right to rewrite federal law?

They say the law is “unclear,” which gives them authority to interpret it.

But common sense says that if the law doesn’t say it, the government can’t do it.

Read the full op-ed at the New York Post

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

Additional coverage of last week’s historic Supreme Court actions in the Loper Bright and Relentless cases

January 23, 2024 — For more background on last week’s historic Supreme Court actions in the Loper Bright and Relentless cases, we are sharing three segments from Fox News.

– Lund’s Fisheries President and co-owner Wayne Reichle joined ‘America Reports’ to discuss the Supreme Court case.
– https://www.foxnews.com/video/6345131453112
– Fox News’ Douglas Kennedy visited Seafreeze and spoke with Fisheries Liaison Megan Lapp to discuss the lengthy legal battle over new fishing regulations.
– https://www.foxnews.com/video/6345054530112
– Fox News’ Martha MacCallum joins Seafreeze Fisheries Liaison Meghan Lapp and NCLA’s President and Chief Legal Officer Mark Chenoweth to discuss landmark case,
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=shared&v=klHR3ca6yT8 (https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=shared&v=klHR3ca6yT8)

Justices to consider case involving fishing boat monitor pay

May 1, 2023 — The U.S. Supreme Court will take up the subject of who pays for workers who gather valuable data aboard commercial fishing boats.

Justices announced Monday that they will take the case, which stems from a lawsuit by a group of fishermen who want to stop the federal government from making them pay for the workers. The workers are tasked with collecting data on board fishing vessels to help inform rules and regulations.

The fishermen involved in the lawsuit harvest Atlantic herring, which is a major fishery off the East Coast that supplies both food and bait. Lead plaintiff Loper Bright Enterprises of New Jersey and other fishing groups have said federal rules unfairly require them to pay hundreds of dollars per day to contractors.

“Our way of life is in the hands of these justices, and we hope they will keep our families and our community in mind as they weigh their decision,” said Bill Bright, a New Jersey fisherman and plaintiff in the case.

Read the full story at AP News