At the close of its term, the Supreme Court released a pair of decisions that upend decades of precedent and will hinder the federal government’s ability to do its job. In overturning the long-running Chevron decision and opening the floodgates to lawsuits challenging established rules, the Court threatens decades of established policy and future policymaking. And it does so at a time when it’s more urgent than ever that our government protects our food, water, climate, and health.

Here’s what you need to know.

1. What is Chevron Deference, and Why Was It Important?

Since 1984’s Chevron decision, courts have been instructed to defer to federal agencies as they interpreted ambiguous laws passed by Congress, so long as their interpretation is reasonable. This “Chevron deference” has played a role in thousands of court decisions over the past 40 years.

When lawmakers write legislation, they’re often dealing with highly technical topics beyond their expertise and issues that evolve and change over time. The work of implementing those laws falls on agencies, like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), that are staffed with scientists and experts.

Chevron deference recognized that it’s in all of our best interest if agency experts, rather than courts, play the leading role in interpreting Congress’s intent and translating statutes into detailed regulations.  

For instance, the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act require polluters to meet certain technology standards to reduce pollution. The laws recognize that technology will advance over time, and they require that standards get stricter as technology improves. 

But Congress didn’t specify what technologies those are or set specific pollution limits — legislating these details would set them in stone. Instead, the EPA determines those details using its technical and scientific expertise.

For decades, lawmakers have written laws this way: broadly, with the understanding that agency experts understand the science best to fill in the gaps. This kind of lawmaking also allows legislation to be flexible and evolve with changing times. In the case of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts, rather than legislate a specific technology that may quickly become obsolete, they allow agencies to update the required technology as it evolves.

Now that the Court has overturned Chevron, scores of agency rules will be more vulnerable to challenges.

2. What About Existing Regulations?

The Supreme Court didn’t only set its sights on new regulations this term. In a second opinion, Corner Post, it also opened the floodgates to challenges of long-standing regulatory protections. This opinion reverses a decades-long understanding that most federal rules can only be challenged for six years after they are issued; this statute of limitations has provided important consistency and certainty. 

Now, corporate actors can sue for six years after they claim they are first harmed by a rule. As a practical matter, this means all they need to do is create a new company or organization to restart the clock — even to sue over protections we have relied on for decades.

3. How Will These Decisions Impact Our Food, Water, and Climate?

SCOTUS’s decisions eliminate courts’ deference to federal agency expertise. Now judges, not agencies, are responsible for interpreting what the law means — even technical laws they know nothing about. 

At the same time, SCOTUS has opened up regulations that have been on the books for decades to industry attack. As a result of these decisions combined, we can expect an onslaught of corporate challenges to everything from public health and consumer protections, to environmental safeguards, to worker standards. And courts reviewing those challenges will no longer give expert agencies the benefit of the doubt.

This extreme power grab by the Court will make it harder for agencies to regulate greenhouse gasses and other pollution, and harder for Congress to legislate by directing agencies to use their expertise. 

The bottom line is, this Supreme Court term was a triumph for corporate polluters that seek to tear down common-sense regulations that defend clean air and water, safe, healthy food, and a livable climate future.

Groups from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (representing fossil fuel giants like Chevron and Exxon Mobil) to Big Ag trade groups wrote to the Court in favor of overturning Chevron. Now, corporate lobbyists are gearing up to push a wave of lawsuits.

4. What Can We Do About It?

Chevron deference has been a critical check on the power of the courts, making it easier for federal agencies to carry out the nation’s bedrock environmental laws. In overturning Chevron while allowing new challenges to established rules, SCOTUS has further tipped the scales in favor of the corporations that have lots to gain from hobbling the government’s basic functions. 

Already, we have bills proposed in Congress that counter the Court’s decisions. For instance, last year, Congressmembers introduced the Stop Corporate Capture Act, which would restore and codify Chevron deference. It would also make agencies’ rulemaking processes more transparent and less vulnerable to corporate influence. 

While the Supreme Court’s right-wing majority has made it clear where they stand, we have the tools to counter their decision and protect our shared environment. Together, we can fight for powerful policy that will rein in corporate polluters, protect our families, and help us build a livable future.