“ A split in decisions among federal appeals courts has set the stage for possibly overturning the Chevron deference. In its ruling on the Cape May fishermen’s

“ A split in decisions among federal appeals courts has set the stage for possibly overturning the Chevron deference. In its ruling on the Cape May fishermen’s case, the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., “decided that broad ‘necessary and appropriate’ language in the Magnuson-Stevens Act, which governs U.S. fisheries, augmented the agency’s regulatory power,” according to a narrative from the New Civil Liberties Alliance. “It then relied heavily on Chevron deference to uphold the agency’s ostensibly reasonable interpretation of a supposedly ambiguous federal statute.” https://www.nationalfisherman.com/national-international/supreme-court-hears-fishermen-s-challenge-that-could-upend-agency-powers https://www.nationalfisherman.com/national-international/sup... Here’s the necessary and proper clause: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-1/ALDE_00001242/#:~:text=To%20make%20all%20Laws%20which,any%20Department%20or%20Officer%20thereof https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S8-C18-1.... It’s hard to square “well congress didn’t intend for them to have that power” when they quoted their own damn rules when they wrote the law. But again, SCOTUS decided Congress doesn’t have that power.