- Posts by Paul DeCamp
Member of the FirmA past Administrator of the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) Wage and Hour Division, attorney Paul DeCamp represents employers in complex wage and hour class and mass actions and government investigations. He also pushes ...
The Supreme Court’s June 28 decision to overrule the 40-year-old case of Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Resources Defense Council should not be cause for alarm. It is, however, likely to have implications for employers that are subject to the myriad of workplace laws administered by the United States Department of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board and other executive branch bodies.
Why the Buzz About Chevron?
For decades, courts have relied on the so-called Chevron doctrine—a mandate by which judges were required to defer to agency expertise when handling controversies surrounding Executive Branch policy, but that rule ended with Loper Bright Enterprises et al., v. Raimondo. While the categorical rejection of Chevron—as inconsistent with the responsibility of courts defined in the APA—went farther than most analysts expected, it should be noted, as Justice Neil Gorsuch’s concurrence makes clear, that the Supreme Court hasn’t decided a case on the basis of Chevron since 2016.
Blog Editors
Recent Updates
- NLRB Finds Lawful Employer Statements to Employees Are Unlawful Going Forward
- NLRB General Counsel Calls for Harsh Remedies for Employers Requiring Non-Competes, "Stay or Pay" Provisions
- NLRB Issues Complaint Alleging Business-to-Business No-Poaching Agreements Violate Employees’ Rights in Latest Attack on Restrictive Covenants
- Western District of Texas Says NLRB Structure Unconstitutional, Issues Injunction Preventing SpaceX Unfair Labor Practice Hearing from Proceeding
- Chevron Is Overturned, but Stakeholders Need Not Worry