Law and Public Affairs: Chevron vs. NRDC

Law and Public Affairs
Student’s Name
Course
Instructor
Date
Law and Public Affairs
Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, Inc.
PROCEDURAL FACTS
Amendments were made in regards to the Clean Air Act (CAA) in 1977 that made it necessary for air polluters with “stationary sources” to first seek a permit given by the state regulator before building those sources. A rule was enacted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that gave a new interpretation to “stationary source” that allowed all pollution-emitting devices to be treated like one single bubble. However, this interpretation did not augur well with the Natural Resource Defense Council (NRDC) that saw it as incorrect and therefore subsequently challenged it. This led to the regulation being set aside and an appeal of the ruling by the plaintiff. The lower court of appeal affirmed. The United States Supreme Court reversed the ruling of the lower court.
SUBSTANTIVE FACTS
The interpretation is given by the plaintiff, (NRDC) was in respect to the Clean Air Act (CAA) goals that sought to maximize economic production while minimizing pollution. EPA’s ruling meant that a permit would be necessary for every time a plant wished to obtain any new pollution-emitting piece. It was also quite clear that the Congress had provided no clear guidelines in regards to how the permit program applied to the single bubble concept. Following the above, the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to have the decision made by the court of appeal on the matter to be reviewed.
ISSUES
Whether the decision by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to consider all devices are ...