> Congress can actually legislate the right of agencies to interpret the gaps in the laws back into effect - by passing a law that explicitly gives agencies thi

> Congress can actually legislate the right of agencies to interpret the gaps in the laws back into effect - by passing a law that explicitly gives agencies this power. They could--but in the case of the Administrative Procedures Act, which is the law relevant to this case, they didn't. Indeed, as the Court's opinion points out, they did the opposite: the Act explicitly says that the courts shall interpret the law when doing so becomes necessary to resolve a case. Note that this actually limits the scope of this ruling in a way that does not appear to be recognized by commentators. The Court here is not saying that Congress can no longer pass a law that explicitly grants interpretive power to an executive branch agency. It's just saying that Congress did something different with this law.