Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The decision articulated a doctrine known as "Chevron deference". [2] Chevron deference consisted of a two-part test that was deferential to government agencies: first, whether Congress has spoken directly to the precise issue at question, and second, "whether the agency's answer is based on a permissible construction of the statute".
Precedent is a judicial decision that serves as an authority for courts when deciding subsequent identical or similar cases. [1] [2] [3] Fundamental to common law legal systems, precedent operates under the principle of stare decisis ("to stand by things decided"), where past judicial decisions serve as case law to guide future rulings, thus promoting consistency and predictability.
The narrower version of the major questions doctrine is as an exception to Chevron deference. Under Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council (1984), courts defer to reasonable agency interpretations of ambiguous provisions: First, always, is the question whether Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue.
The question of whether this precedent should still stand is now before the high court because two commercial fishing companies (Relentless and Loper Bright) argued that the National Marine ...
The doctrine of precedent developed during the 12th and 13th centuries, [52] as the collective judicial decisions that were based in tradition, custom and precedent. [53] The form of reasoning used in common law is known as casuistry or case-based reasoning.
But Coinbase also attempted a more consequential plea by invoking the major questions doctrine, a guiding principle established by the Supreme Court that says Congress should not delegate to ...
Held that people of African ancestry (whether free or not) were not United States Citizens, and therefore lacked standing to sue. This ruling stood as precedent until the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 7–2 Georgia v. Tennessee Copper Co. 1907
In United States constitutional law, the political question doctrine holds that a constitutional dispute that requires knowledge of a non-legal character or the use of techniques not suitable for a court or explicitly assigned by the Constitution to the U.S. Congress, or the President of the United States, lies within the political, rather than the legal, realm to solve, and judges customarily ...