Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

(Study Tips, Dealing With Stress, Maintaining a Social Life, Financial Aid, Internships, Bar Exam, Careers in Law . . . )
Scuppers
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:29 am

Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

Postby Scuppers » Wed May 13, 2015 4:25 pm

Why and when do you use Chevron step 2 instead of State Farm? If you're going through the Mead/Chevron analysis, do you do arbitrary and capricious too, or is arb and cap just another way of saying reasonable/persuasive under Chev 2?

How do they all tie together? Do you run through all of them on a given fact pattern?

Thanks.

timmyd
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 8:50 pm

Re: Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

Postby timmyd » Wed May 13, 2015 10:00 pm

This is a tricky question and there is some confusion as to whether the question of an agency's interpretation of a statute it administers being reasonable under step 2 refers to reasonableness in the statutory interpretation sense, or in the arbitrary and capricious sense. I think if given this question it wouldn't hurt to analyze it under State Farm, some portions of state farm don't go eel with it though, such as whether the decision supported by the evidence. However, the question of whether they relied on the appropriate factors goes with it well.
Its an open question and profs write a lot about it, I think they are a little bit different, especially because with respect to explicit delegations of statutory authority, the court explitely mentioned arbitrary and capricious review. Hope that helps, please see the question I posted in this thread as well.

User avatar
jk148706
Posts: 2499
Joined: Fri May 10, 2013 11:14 am

Re: Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

Postby jk148706 » Wed May 13, 2015 10:16 pm

Depends on your professor. Our professor said some people like to do a A&C analysis in step two, but he specifically said not to do that. They are separate.

Chevron is about whether the agency's regulation/ interpretation is reasonable (not foreclosed by the statute). It's about the interpretation of the statute; the substance of the regulation.

State farm is whether the PROCESS the agency followed in promulgating the regulation was correct. So long as the agency followed the correct process through N&C rule making, it will be fine under State Farm (but could still be unreasonable and fail under Chevron step 2)

So, yes, always do the analysis of both State Farm and Chevron independently.

Disclaimer: This is just how my prof taught it, and I think other profs have different ideas about it.

timmyd
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 8:50 pm

Re: Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

Postby timmyd » Wed May 13, 2015 10:36 pm

The above seems like a rational way to approach it, my prof specifically drew attention to notes debating this issue and left it unresolved. If your prof said nothing about it either way....might not hurt to at least note the issue.
Question: congress delegates authority to two agencies that administer the same statute. The statute is ambiguous and the agencies come to conflicting interpretations. Say they are both reasonable...how is this resolved? I found Oregon v. Gonzalez saying the agency with more expertise gets the deference, didn't know if any of y'all had actually talked about this in class. I think you could also make the argument at step zero or 1.5 whatever you want to call it, that this type of system indicates a congressional intent to afford deference to neither, or it at least is arguable.

User avatar
malleus discentium
Posts: 878
Joined: Sun May 26, 2013 2:30 am

Re: Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

Postby malleus discentium » Wed May 13, 2015 10:39 pm

jk148706 wrote:Depends on your professor. Our professor said some people like to do a A&C analysis in step two, but he specifically said not to do that. They are separate.

Chevron is about whether the agency's regulation/ interpretation is reasonable (not foreclosed by the statute). It's about the interpretation of the statute; the substance of the regulation.

State farm is whether the PROCESS the agency followed in promulgating the regulation was correct. So long as the agency followed the correct process through N&C rule making, it will be fine under State Farm (but could still be unreasonable and fail under Chevron step 2)

So, yes, always do the analysis of both State Farm and Chevron independently.

Disclaimer: This is just how my prof taught it, and I think other profs have different ideas about it.

This is also my understanding. A&C is about inputs, not outputs (why did you decide what you did?). Chevron 2 is about outputs (is what you decided reasonable?).

Longtimecoming19
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 7:19 pm

Re: Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

Postby Longtimecoming19 » Thu May 14, 2015 1:01 am

Hard Look Review and the Chevron doctrine are deeply related, but I think that the 'arbitrary & capricious' test isn't what you apply at Step Two. Suppose a statute can mean A, B, C or D. Step Two asks whether your interpretation is one of those things. State Farm asks why you chose that one over the other three.

Scuppers
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 4:29 am

Re: Admin Law - State Farm/Chevron

Postby Scuppers » Thu May 14, 2015 11:37 am

All of you make sense, and that's helpful. Thanks!




Return to “Forum for Law School Students”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], esrom55 and 13 guests