StockNews.AI
CVX
StockNews.AI
14 hrs

After Ending Chevron Deference, NCLA Asks First Circuit to Reel in Illegal Fishery Monitoring Rule

1. NCLA is appealing NOAA's rule on herring fishermen's costs. 2. Supreme Court's ruling impacts agency interpretation authority. 3. Potential costs for fishermen may decrease if the Herring Rule is overturned. 4. Judicial authority over agency actions is restored post-Chevron ruling. 5. If upheld, the Herring Rule could set a costly precedent for fisheries.

6m saved
Insight
Article

FAQ

Why Neutral?

The ruling primarily affects fisheries, not directly impacting CVX's oil and gas operations historically. However, ongoing regulatory scrutiny can raise operational costs for broader industry players, including CVX.

How important is it?

Though the direct impact is limited, the implications on regulatory frameworks can affect overall operational costs for industries, including CVX. The changing legal landscape could influence investor sentiment regarding regulatory risks in energy businesses.

Why Long Term?

If regulatory trends shift significantly towards increased litigation, companies like CVX may see long-term implications in regulatory costs. Historical instances show that similar shifts have longer-lasting impacts on operational costs and compliance.

Related Companies

XOMBPSLB
Washington, DC, Sept. 03, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The New Civil Liberties Alliance is appealing the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island’s July decision in Relentless, Inc. v. Dept. of Commerce that upheld a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) rule requiring Atlantic herring fishermen to pay for at-sea government monitors on their boats. Upon remand from the Supreme Court’s landmark Loper Bright v. Raimondo and Relentless decision, the district court failed to heed the Court’s admonition that silence does not confer power on administrators. NCLA will ask the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit to reverse the errant district court decision, set aside the Herring Rule, and vacate the Industry-Funded Monitoring (IFM) Omnibus Amendment issued by the New England Fishery Management Council (NEFMC). To enforce the Amendment, NOAA must issue separate rules for each fishery. NCLA has consistently sought to vacate both the Rule and the Amendment. NCLA convinced the Supreme Court last year in Relentless to overturn the unconstitutional Chevron doctrine, eliminating judicial deference to agency interpretations of allegedly ambiguous or silent statutes. The State Policy Network and the Institute for Justice recently awarded the “Chip Mellor Prize for Excellence in Public Interest Litigation” to NCLA for this achievement. With Chevron deference gone, courts are required to evaluate agency actions based on the statute’s language, without substituting the agency’s interpretations for what Congress wrote. This dramatic legal shift rightfully restores judicial authority to determine the meaning of the law to the courts, rather than relying on agencies’ often self-aggrandizing interpretations. The district court’s opinion relied on a non-existent “presumption” to hold that regulated parties must pay the regulator’s costs—including the salaries of government monitors—a notion that is contrary to the text of the statute and the Supreme Court’s prior ruling. The First Circuit should recognize that the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act (MSA) does not permit the agency’s controversial amendment and that Congress never authorized the Secretary of Commerce, under the MSA, to force New England fishermen into contracts with onboard observers. The costly Industry-Funded Monitoring program was imposed without statutory authorization. Without Chevron deference to a supposed ‘gap’ or ‘silence’ in the statute, this unlawful rule and amendment must be set aside. If this program is not stopped, the Herring Rule will be just the first of many industry-funded regulatory monitoring programs. NCLA released the following statements: “The Supreme Court has ruled silence does not confer power on agencies. A presumption that salaries of government monitors should be paid by fishermen and not the government cannot be allowed to insert deference to agencies under another name.”— John Vecchione, Senior Litigation Counsel, NCLA “Why on earth the same Administration that says it wants agencies to implement Loper Bright/Relentless continues to press its case against these fishermen is hard to understand.”— Kara Rollins, Litigation Counsel, NCLA “The government’s continuing defense of NOAA’s at-sea monitor rule is unfathomable. The Department of Justice needs to take the ‘L’ on this one and find better things to do than keep harassing America’s fishermen. Where is President Trump? Where is Secretary Lutnick? They need to get control of their runaway regulators.”— Mark Chenoweth, President, NCLA For more information visit the case page here. ABOUT NCLA NCLA is a nonpartisan, nonprofit civil rights group founded by prominent legal scholar Philip Hamburger to protect constitutional freedoms from violations by the Administrative State. NCLA’s public-interest litigation and other pro bono advocacy strive to tame the unlawful power of state and federal agencies and to foster a new civil liberties movement that will help restore Americans’ fundamental rights. ###

Related News