It isn't simple. The judgement states that broad implied deference to the agency of the act in question, per Chevron, is incorrect and the courts decide in the

It isn't simple. The judgement states that broad implied deference to the agency of the act in question, per Chevron, is incorrect and the courts decide in the those case. There were a ton of arguments that interpretation, in general, is an Article 3 right of the courts. Though, I'd assume if congress explicitly granted interpretation to the specific agency of the act, we'd have a separate case on whether they're allowed to do that (explicitly defer).